New Abu Ghraib images broadcast, but they are afraid to show cartoons

[Jeremiah]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4715540.stm

Images of suspected Abu Ghraib abuse. Courtesy SBS television
Suspected Abu Ghraib abuse. Courtesy SBS television
An Australian TV channel has broadcast previously unpublished images showing apparent US abuse of prisoners in Iraq's Abu Ghraib jail in 2003.

The images shown on SBS television were from the same source as those that caused an outcry around the world and led to several US troops being jailed.

The new images show "homicide, torture and ****** humiliation", SBS said.

They are part of a court case in the US. A judge has ruled they can be published but the case is continuing.

The broadcast of the images comes at a time of increased tension between Muslim nations and the West over cartoons satirising the Prophet Muhammad.

Convicted

One of the videos broadcast on the SBS programme Dateline on Wednesday appears to show prisoners being forced to masturbate to the camera.

Other video footage appears to show a prisoner hitting his head against a wall.


It is for the public to decide on looking at them what needs to be done
Amrit Singh,
American Civil Liberties Union

Some photos are said to show corpses. There are also images of prisoners with body and head wounds.

Some of the pictures have been posted on the SBS website.

SBS journalist Olivia Rousset told the BBC one of them showed a senior Iraqi officer being treated for a throat wound received after he resisted being transferred within the camp.

Some of the new photos showed soldiers who have already been convicted for their part in the abuse, including Private Lynndie England and Charles Graner, the man prosecutors said was the ringleader in the scandal.

A number are versions of the photographs that caused outrage when they were initially leaked, including the prisoner wearing a hood and hooked to wires.

SBS interviewed US Congress members who were given a private viewing of all the images at the time the original photos were leaked in 2004.

"They were shocked by what these extra images revealed of the full horror of the abuses taking place at Abu Ghraib," the channel said.

The images are part of a group of more than 100 photographs and four videos taken at Abu Ghraib and later handed to the US army's Criminal Investigations Division.

'Public interest'

In September a New York judge ruled that pictures of the alleged abuse should be released under Freedom of Information provisions.

He was responding to a request from the American Civil Liberties Union for access to 87 unseen images.

The judge rejected the government's arguments that publication could fuel anti-US feelings.

American Civil Liberties Union lawyer Amrit Singh told SBS Dateline: "The photographs have to be released so the public have some idea of what happened at Abu Ghraib.

"It is for the public to decide on looking at them what needs to be done."

The channel defended broadcasting the images.

Mike Carey, executive producer of Dateline, told AFP news agency they were shown "because it is an important matter of public interest that the full story of abuse at Abu Ghraib be told".

US President George W Bush has said the Abu Ghraib abuse was a "disgrace".

Nine junior soldiers have been convicted - some are serving jail sentences. All senior US commanders have so far been cleared of any crime.

The US commander in charge of Abu Ghraib at the time, Janis Karpinski, was reduced in rank from general to colonel and found guilty of dereliction of duty.

[Argyll]

I seem to recall an article recently,that stated there was more coming relating to the original Abu Gharaib scandal,stuff that the USG was trying to keep a lid on........looks like they failed,between the Brits beating the Teenagers in Basra,the cartoons and now this,it's going to turn Iraq and other Regions into a furore.......jesus,why do people take video's and dumb pics,knowing they could be caught and disciplined for it?

This just isn't going to go away.......what a PR disaster

[Jaguar]

(...) jesus,why do people take video's and dumb pics,knowing they could be caught and disciplined for it?

I wonder why too. Freud would have the answer ;) .

[2Sheds_Jackson]

I ranted about this yesterday in another thread. CNN is running a disclaimer at the bottom of all their "cartoon" stories, pointing out that they won't publish the cartoons because they don't want to fan the flames. Well, what's the difference between cartoons that enrage people and these videos that enrage people? They point out that they can report on the cartoons without actually showing the cartoons. What a shame that they can't find a way to do the same with this subject matter. I wonder why that is.

[S70A_9]

I am totally disappointed by SBS - the TV channel which publicised these images.

Sure, what went on was bad, bad news - but it's been dealt with.
I cannot understand why, for any reason other than pouring fuel on the fire, did SBS broadcast these images - especially given the audience of the station which broadcasts in multiple languages to all kinds of ethnicities within Australia. Perhaps the government cut some funding to them, or maybe they have shares in the people insuring embassies and consulates here in Australia.

It is shameful self promotion, and a most obvious attempt to sabotage the healing process from when these images were originally taken and others shown. :|

[Pille1234]

The new images show "homicide, torture and ****** humiliation", SBS said.

Great that those pictures were finally made public. There are more than enough ppl around who still believe that "a little beating" was all that happened in Abu Ghraib.

[joedirt]

you cannot suppress news these pictures should have been released in the initial batch.

pretty nasty stuff

[ed316]

Let the games begin. How can Rummy still have his job?

[Fargin]

I seem to recall an article recently,that stated there was more coming relating to the original Abu Gharaib scandal,stuff that the USG was trying to keep a lid on........looks like they failed,between the Brits beating the Teenagers in Basra,the cartoons and now this,it's going to turn Iraq and other Regions into a furore.......jesus,why do people take video's and dumb pics,knowing they could be caught and disciplined for it?

This just isn't going to go away.......what a PR disaster
Argyll What I always imagined happening was that these guards became desensitized by a number of things. I think they were encouraged and inspired by watching interrogating teams work and learned what was accepted and what was not(which apparently nothing was). They also saw their President saying on national TV that illegal combatants were excepted from domestic and international law. I my oppinion this sends an unclear message that requires great honor and selfdiscipline to operate inside a penal or interrogation center with total autonomousity. They either operated without any supervision or with acceptance from above. I actually don't know which is worst, but I think there are circumstantial evidence that this where accepted or promoted from above.

And when the abuse becomes part of your everyday life, taboos starts to fade. The difference between right and wrong might start to disappear and if some acts of power and interrogation appears acceptable, why not tell home about it and send some funny snapshots?

Highly skilled and experienced interrogation teams know exactly what they do and how to break a detainee with knowledge of cultural and religious taboos and how to inflict uncomfort, terror and physical harm. They also know they are operating beyond international agreements and what isn't morally defendable by public standarts. They know that some of the interrogation methods can not be revealed and they maintain procedures top secret.

But if they are working with unskilled guards confidentially can be breached. Because uneducated guards does not completely grasps what's exactly's going on and do not have the sense of operational security and these interrogation crews has.

Anyways that's my tinfoil hat conspiracy theory for you.

Again some are more conserned by the breach of security, than the breach of human decency. I think I'm to cynical to be truely shocked, I kind of expected something would surface in the waves of W. Bush's speach.


I am totally disappointed by SBS - the TV channel which publicised these images.

Sure, what went on was bad, bad news - but it's been dealt with.
I cannot understand why, for any reason other than pouring fuel on the fire, did SBS broadcast these images - especially given the audience of the station which broadcasts in multiple languages to all kinds of ethnicities within Australia. Perhaps the government cut some funding to them, or maybe they have shares in the people insuring embassies and consulates here in Australia.

It is shameful self promotion, and a most obvious attempt to sabotage the healing process from when these images were originally taken and others shown. :|
I think we derserved to know exactly what being done all over Afghanistan, Iraq, Guantanamo Bay, Pakistan and other black sites in our name. This doesn't even come close of the atrocities commited durring holocaust, but it's neither our finest hour as the civilized top of the evolutionary ladder.


Great that those pictures were finally made public. There are more than enough ppl around who still believe that "a little beating" was all that happened in Abu Ghraib.
I don't think many(if any) actually believes that it was just minor incidents and sorority pranks. But some just don't really see any problems or inconsistancies.

[Caribou Kid]

I am fully stoked that SBS (a government sponsored television channel, might add) broadcast these images and videos. You want to disarm the cries of one sided censorship and media bias everyone says is transpiring, well then, SHOW IMAGERY LIKE THIS. Timing be damned, the truth is the truth, and as some have already pointed out earlier in this thread, these should have come out Lo-o-oooong ago. Remember the old maxim our friends in law enforcement/security are so quick to resort to when convenient "if you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear?" Isn't it peculiar how the same concept does not apply if you're talking about the .Gov
S70_A9, you need to ease off on the righteous indignation and go get a more real world exposure before you start dissing one our most precious media assets, me thinks. perhaps you would prefer the Abu Gharaib investigative journalism be handled by those dilligently "unbiased" folks on the O'Reily Hour on Foxtel... NOT! I fully respect our right to having our own individual opinion here in Vegemite Land, and our precious right to express ourselves in whatever reasonable manner we see fit. But seriously, bloke, to suggest that this program was aired as some lame form of retribution at the .Gov for cutting funding...? That isn't just clutching at straws mate, it's downright astounding. I would sincerely be impressed if you could provide us here at MP.net with the source or insiration for this gem of wisdom... Shameless self promotion, and shares in Embassy Insurance providers? Puh-leeze! Can we say "sensationalistic?" I hear the British tabloids are looking for a few good men, S70_a9.

I thank Buddha, Allah, Ahura Mazda,Krishna and Jehova that we live in a freedom-loving nation that has the courage and ability to air points of view contrary to the spoon-fed drivel of the majority of main stream media. (FOX news, this means YOU!) As I said before, timing be damned. Would it have been any less inflammatory if it had been released on say, ..July 4th? December 24th? september 11th?I think not.
Take a chill pill, mate. There's a lot more to OZ than your POV, okay?

[Argyll]

I'm dissapointed that the posted felt the need to link this to the cartoons,when there is no mention of being afraid to show them in the article...........that's in my opinion a deliberate attempt at flame baiting.

The difference between this,and the cartoons is that these pics reflect mans inhumanity to fellow man,whilst the cartoons are/were being derogatory to an entire Religion!

I have to agree,that they should have been made public back then,but you can thank Donald Rumsfelt for that as he issued a ban on further printing,he knew these pics existed,he aknowledged that what was already shown,wasn't the worst images,and that there were more ,more damaging,well if this is the case,then he should have punished the people involved more severely instead of attemting to keep a lid on the images.

The media for whatever motive are playing a dangerous game,and are jeapordising the men and women on the ground in Iraq.But at the same time,those people who complained about the cartoons being all about "Freedom of speech" have zero grounds for complaint in the publishing of these pics and video's,if people had the right to see these cartoons,and form their own opinions,then they have the same right to see the current Abu Ghraib shytfest.

[Dervish]

The world needs to know what is going on in these jails. Apparantly there is a picture of a group of men masturbating to the camera... ****in disgusting.

Charged Charles Graner said that he was acting under orders. This is likely the case. Apparantly it was a policy not a "few individual acts".

Charles Graner and Pvt. England shouldnt be charged... because they were acting on orders.

[Fargin]

The media for whatever motive are playing a dangerous game,and are jeapordising the men and women on the ground in Iraq.
I really don't think the pictures are the main issue in this scandal.

Charles Graner and Pvt. England lacked the personal initiative and authority to commit these acts single handedly, clearly they are scapegoats. They where just hicks immitating their rolemodels and they got proper ****** by the court.

[Weasel]

I can´t trust my eyes. Some people really blame the media for publishing the photos instead of blaming those animals who committed the crimes. :cantbeli:

[babydave]

its irresponsible of the media to start publishing these pictures again, its old news. they are just trying to be provocative in order to sell more papers/get more ratings. the problem comes when you get uneducated people in iraq thinking these are new images and start killing our troops because of it.

no need to release these photos again, just as there is no need to print more inflammatory cartoons just to get a reaction.

[Mr.K]

I wonder why too. Freud would have the answer ;) .

I have the answer : money

[Weasel]

its irresponsible of the media to start publishing these pictures again, its old news. they are just trying to be provocative in order to sell more papers/get more ratings. the problem comes when you get uneducated people in iraq thinking these are new images and start killing our troops because of it.

no need to release these photos again, just as there is no need to print more inflammatory cartoons just to get a reaction.
It´s irresponsible to have a torture camp like Abu Ghraib.

[caridon]

Well, what's the difference between cartoons that enrage people and these videos that enrage people?

The cartoons have only the purpose to enrage persons.

The pictures have several other purposes and the enraging is a sideeffect.

/C

[Asheren]

I only hope it will not end like Vietnam and there will be no no more Iraq like there was no more Vietnam. Cos some medias starting to enter sam path as in Vietnam evil coalition vs good insurgents.

[Fargin]

I only hope it will not end like Vietnam and there will be no no more Iraq like there was no more Vietnam. Cos some medias starting to enter sam path as in Vietnam evil coalition vs good insurgents.
I always considered Iraq a new Vietnam 2, too many similarities.

US should have taken it to the top, revealed all and stopped it in the running. Refusing to deal with it either implies acceptance or indifference and this will continue to haunt whatever good deeds G.I. Joes do.

[Kekkonen]

Here is another one of the "new" photos, didn't see it posted on BBC.

http://www.dn.se/content/1/c6/52/17/96/overgreppetta445.jpg

[Fargin]

Here is another one of the "new" photos, didn't see it posted on BBC.

http://www.dn.se/content/1/c6/52/17/96/overgreppetta445.jpg
It's a damn disgrace... I mean to publicize the picture.

[Omaha]

The world needs to know what is going on in these jails. Apparantly there is a picture of a group of men masturbating to the camera... ****in disgusting.

Oh go to hell, you have no proof of such an asinine statement.

[SIZE=2]Charged Charles Graner said that he was acting under orders. This is likely the case. Apparantly it was a policy not a "few individual acts".

Charles Graner and Pvt. England shouldnt be charged... because they were acting on orders.


The Nazi's were "acting under orders" Should they have not of been charged either?



The public has no right to know anything. The court system has the only right to know everything.

Don’t ever confuse that, and think for a second that some silly article (where I am sure the above information was gathered :roll: ) printed for no better reason to piss off a few more Arabs and feed anti-Americanism advances ANYTHING.

Besides, how do we know what is real and what isn’t? Like the picture posted here. I could have filmed that in my basement for all any of you know. And don’t think there isn’t people (or papers) that are willing to go as far either.

[PeterG]

This whole affair is hard to get a grip on. In part it seems like someone - like C.Graner, ran the prison like his own private S/M *** dungeon, and in addition, 'intelligence' ordered prisoners 'softened up' before interrogation. Leaving this alleged practice to these retards. It just doesn't make any sense! To be cynical, it would make a lot more sense if they quietly gave insurgents/terrorists the full 'Lubyanka' treatment. But this? And many of these prisoners have since been released - there must be among them some of the most dedicated and motivated insurgents in Iraq!

[Noob Brit]

The public has no right to know anything.

?? It was an attempt to keep the public from knowing anything that has managed to turn 1 Abu Ghraib scandal into.... 2 Abu Ghraib scandals. This should all have been cleared up when the story first broke. 2 years later and we're back to square 1 again. :|

[joedirt]

I personally feel there is much more to this story then we are being told. I saw at least one picture from the initial release of images that included a pretty substantial ammount of people watching. second I suspect they learned these techniques from the military and civilian interogators who where at the facility. The images of the prisoner hung upside down from the bunkbed looks like Torture 101 same for the mock electrodes pic. Grainer deffinetly is a bad cat he seems to be getting enjoyment out of his actions in most of his pictures and is shown numerous times beating prisoners. But I find it hard to believe that nobody of higher rank knew of what was going on.

[Omaha]

?? It was an attempt to keep the public from knowing anything that has managed to turn 1 Abu Ghraib scandal into.... 2 Abu Ghraib scandals. This should all have been cleared up when the story first broke. 2 years later and we're back to square 1 again. :|




Knowing is nice, but to think public knowledge is the end all be all of importance is not only wrong but silly at best.

If the Arabs go crazy over cartoons, the broadcasting of pictures as such would do nothing but stir the pot.

Would it be worth it if everything was released, and some kid from Kansas that is just doing his job dies because of it? Or how about his entire unit because some guy decided to fill his Toyota with artillery rounds he dug up behind his house and rammed it into a check point? Or an IP station? Would that make it worth while?

The public has no RIGHT to know about anything. Only the judicial branch and the ones directly associated to the legal case NEED to know. Some asshole in France reading his daily 'Le hate America' doesn't need to know a God damn thing. And neither does anyone else.

[Weasel]

The public has no right to know anything. The court system has the only right to know everything.

You call that how? Democracy? A free world? rofl

[Weasel]

Have you read your own comments about the Muslim cartoons? Have you compared/contrasted those comments with the ones here?
Sorry, can´t find a single post of mine where I justified violence, torture or similar things. Can you show me where you found it?

[Omaha]

You call that how? Democracy? A free world? rofl



Show me where it says in our constitution that the public needs to know everything that the government does, even if that means that more violence will be caused because of it, or the only reason a paper would do such a thing is to sell more of their smut.

Let me know when you find that.

The world has nothing to do with it. My point still stands.

[Mailman]

The cartoons have only the purpose to enrage persons.

The pictures have several other purposes and the enraging is a sideeffect.

/C

What absolute rubbish. The cartoons were never intended to be derogatory or inflamatory but were supposed to show how politically correct the publishing world has become.

Using these images, a couple years after they were taken for no other apparent reason than to fan the flames that were created by the cartoons is simply irresponsible.

Some of you have said "we need to know what went on"...well bugger me if you dont already know what went on in AG. What further point is there in using these pictures other than to stoke the flames of anti-american sentiment around the world?

Also, SBS isnt exactly known for is balanced and well reasoned reporting is it...after that reported who was put with marines wrote some of the most single sided rubbish this side of no where!

Mailman

[Weasel]

Show me where it says in our constitution that the public needs to know everything that the government does, even if that means that more violence will be caused because of it, or the only reason a paper would do such a thing is to sell more of their smut.

Let me know when you find that.

The world has nothing to do with it. My point still stands.
I understand your point. But in contrast to you I, as a free citizen, don´t want to be hold as a deaf, dumb and blind sheep, led by almighty leaders and without any right to raise my voice. It´s your point and way of life, not mine.

[Fargin]

http://img471.imageshack.us/img471/3976/afewgoodmenpic64fo.jpg

[Weasel]

No, but I'd be delighted to show you are series of highly conflicted posts to include where you criticised/complained about a certain newspaper for posting cartoons that were derogatory to Islam but not posting those they felt were derogatory to Christianity. Here you criticise people for having a similiar complaint; asking why not publish cartoons that are offensive, when these organizations publish photo's and editorials they feel are intended to be offensive.

Ofcourse you are often a ball of conflict. You state it is provocative to publish cartoons and you don't like to jump on the bandwagon or be inciteful; ofcourse that doesn't stop you from doing it to others when the mood suits. And yes, loads of threads could be brought up, just look back a few days to your wonderful businessman story - I'm sure that was meant to spark intellectual debate.


Me, personally I think that the media can publish what-ever the fark they want. Ofcourse, they can also be held accountable, such is the nature of a free system.
You compare the crime of torturing, maybe killing possibly innocent people to cartoons published in a newspaper? What is the bigger crime, you think?
My point is clear: publishing the cartoons wasn´t illegal, it´s was only very silly and naive. Torturing and killing people is a crime. And if this crime is committed in the name of a nation, this nation has the right to know about it. Otherwise every crime ever committed in times of war or by national agencies wouldn´t ever come to light. I, as a citizen of a free country, have the right to know what soldiers are doing in the name my country. And if they commit a crime I want to see them hang - including the responisble politician.

PS: The story of the businessmen was a different subject and you took it totally out of context.

[Noob Brit]

Knowing is nice, but to think public knowledge is the end all be all of importance is not only wrong but silly at best.

If the Arabs go crazy over cartoons, the broadcasting of pictures as such would do nothing but stir the pot.

Would it be worth it if everything was released, and some kid from Kansas that is just doing his job dies because of it? Or how about his entire unit because some guy decided to fill his Toyota with artillery rounds he dug up behind his house and rammed it into a check point? Or an IP station? Would that make it worth while?



My point was this information was already public knowledge, the damage was done over 2 years ago. If the US had come clean when it was rumbled, we wouldn't be in the situation we're in today. If there are repercussions to this latest release of images, they are largely self inflicted by the US attempting to cover up the worst details 2 years ago when it couldn't really have got any worse for them.

The timing of the release is disgusting - we all know it's being done to stoke up further controversy but that's not the point I'm making. If the US came clean when the truth was revealed, that "kid from Kansas" would have a better chance tomorrow.


The public has no RIGHT to know about anything

We DO have the right. It's our taxes that pay for the actions our elected governments make and our choice to decide if we support what is done in our name. It's called freedom and democracy which is what our armies are supposed to defend. :roll:

[M_S]

This is disgusting, all of you bitching about the cartoons do it somewhere else.

Sentence the bastards that did this for some VERY long jail time. And shut abu ghraib down, we cannot affrod a third scandal! Seems like human rights do not excist in that place not even with americans running it.

What a disgrace!

[Argyll]

unfortunately there's more to come,it was stated at the time the stuff released was pale in comparison to what was kept under wraps,whoever released this batch knew what they were doing

[S70A_9]

It just all should have come out in the one hit.

More pics now seem to allege it is still common practice - something I hope it's not - but is there any evidence to say this sh!t has been cleaned up, or is the world waiting for the next batch of photos with the date mark of 2006 in the corner of the photos?

[babydave]

The public has no RIGHT to know about anything. Only the judicial branch and the ones directly associated to the legal case NEED to know. Some asshole in France reading his daily 'Le hate America' doesn't need to know a God damn thing. And neither does anyone else

i agree with this in part, there is no need for such sensitive military matters to be out in the open.

but again how can people be so stupid as to take pictures of the events?

and also if they are going to torture the people (which is wrong) then do it but dont use *** acts and such like to do it. when these photos first surfaced ALL photos should have been made available, not so so some 2 bit broadcaster can use them to their advantage, and you can bet that some of our soldiers will die because of these photos.


I can´t trust my eyes. Some people really blame the media for publishing the photos instead of blaming those animals who committed the crimes

there should have been some sort of legislation whereby the pictures cant be released anymore because all it does is inflame the middle east when its just old news, but it wont be reported to them like it has been to us. yes we know america was bad for the prison scandal but to release anything now serves no purpose at all, its got nothing to do with democracy or free speech its just about the medias twisted way of making more $$$ if there was anothe rincident at another jail or another incident at the same jail later on then fine that serves a purpose because it is news, but this isnt.

[Fargin]

There should also have been some sort of legislation whereby you can't ******ly abuse detainees to gather dope anymore because all it does is inflame the middle east.

[babydave]

yeah totally what they did was wrong but bringing up the same incident again again serves no purpose but to wind a group of people up that will start targeting our soldiers who had nothing to do with the abuse in return

[Omaha]

My point was this information was already public knowledge, the damage was done over 2 years ago. If the US had come clean when it was rumbled, we wouldn't be in the situation we're in today. If there are repercussions to this latest release of images, they are largely self inflicted by the US attempting to cover up the worst details 2 years ago when it couldn't really have got any worse for them.

The timing of the release is disgusting - we all know it's being done to stoke up further controversy but that's not the point I'm making. If the US came clean when the truth was revealed, that "kid from Kansas" would have a better chance tomorrow.



We DO have the right. It's our taxes that pay for the actions our elected governments make and our choice to decide if we support what is done in our name. It's called freedom and democracy which is what our armies are supposed to defend. :roll:




What's done is done. If I could go back and change things, I would, and so would you. But unless you can, because I know I can't, then we are stuck with our current reality.

Fanning the already roaring flames is not only irresponsible, but unnecessary.

What purpose does it serve? What will it accomplish? Who will it benefit? Who will it hurt?

I see nothing good out of the answers to these questions.

The truth is already out there. Things were done at AG that were horrible acts that managed to do nothing but stain the reputation of a country, and shame it's true soldiers. The people responsible, have been dealt with, and punished. Any "photos" some news paper has, the government has already seen, and they have sentenced the guilty parties as they saw fit.


Showing more pictures does nothing but kick us while we try and clean up the mess.

I have shared my opinion, and I see it as quite valid. You can have the last word if it floats your boat.

[babydave]

omaha has hit the nail on the head

[caridon]

its irresponsible of the media to start publishing these pictures again, its old news. they are just trying to be provocative in order to sell more papers/get more ratings. the problem comes when you get uneducated people in iraq thinking these are new images and start killing our troops because of it.

no need to release these photos again, just as there is no need to print more inflammatory cartoons just to get a reaction.

1) it is not OLD new. These are the pictures the Administration fought tooth and nail not to show the public.

2) The pictures are NEW they have never been shown to the public before, and the public has a right to know.

3) if hte administration had released the pictures together with the other pictures this would not have been a problem.

So dont blame the media, the blame is with the administration, they made their bed......

/C

[caridon]

The public has no right to know anything.

Most democracy experts would totaly dissagree with you.
The public MUST know as much as posible because otherwise they cant make an INFORMED choise in the elections.

Only dictators and those that have things to hide tries to misslead the public.


/C

[szr]

Most democracy experts would totaly dissagree with you.
The public MUST know as much as posible because otherwise they cant make an INFORMED choise in the elections.

Only dictators and those that have things to hide tries to misslead the public.


/CSo you think it would be ok if, somehow, only Americans were able to know? Maybe through some national FOIA information distribution system or something--because we (Americans) are the tax-paying, voting public in this particular case, not the Pakistanis or the British or the Swedes or the Koreans or the Australians or Argintinians... If that's what you're saying, then, cool--maybe we should look into something like that. Allow free-flow of otherwise sensitive information to Americans who have a right to know, without letting it spill out to everyone else who doesn't. (Maybe in a perfect world, but unrealistic in this one).

For some reason, though, I have a feeling that that's not what you meant. And even though you tried to make this an issue of democracy and voters holding their own leaders accountable, you believe that actually you have a right to this information too.

Just from a legal standpoint, the public doesn't have a right to know everything, especially when national security is involved.

[caridon]

So you think it would be ok if, somehow, only Americans were able to know? Maybe through some national FOIA information distribution system or something--because we (Americans) are the tax-paying, voting public in this particular case, not the Pakistanis or the British or the Swedes or the Koreans or the Australians or Argintinians... If that's what you're saying, then, cool--maybe we should look into something like that. Allow free-flow of otherwise sensitive information to Americans who have a right to know, without letting it spill out to everyone else who doesn't. (Maybe in a perfect world, but unrealistic in this one).

For some reason, though, I have a feeling that that's not what you meant. And even though you tried to make this an issue of democracy and voters holding their own leaders accountable, you believe that actually you have a right to this information too.

Just from a legal standpoint, the public doesn't have a right to know everything, especially when national security is involved.


Att a minimum the american public has a right to know (to hold their leaders acountable.)

In this case i belive the public of every country involved in iraq (that would be just about everyone) has a right to know because it has to do with how their leaders deal with iraq and the USA. As usual it is very hard to draw the lines where someone has the right to know.

And as counter to your argument. If only the american public would have the right to know then SAdam would have been right to withhold information about his lawbreakning from other nations and their citicens.

I'm not talking law here but morals and ethics and that subject is more ambigous, there are no black and white situations.

The second consideration from a moral point of view is that a crime hould NEVER be allowed to be hidden by the national security excuse, because then every wrongdowing a goverment does can be hidden that way.

There are a lot of cases in history where national security has ben used to save a goverment official from criminal charges.

/C

[szr]

And as counter to your argument. If only the american public would have the right to know then SAdam would have been right to withhold information about his lawbreakning from other nations and their citicens.Are we talking about right (and wrong) or rights? I'm not really interested in right or wrong because everyone acts in their own interests. Saddam did and does withhold information. And now that he's in custody and on trial he has the right to continue to do so.


The second consideration from a moral point of view is that a crime hould NEVER be allowed to be hidden by the national security excuse, because then every wrongdowing a goverment does can be hidden that way.

There are a lot of cases in history where national security has ben used to save a goverment official from criminal charges.

/CConversely, if you want to destroy a government in a liberal democracy, accuse it of many crimes and fuel the media barrage with accusations, rumors and hearsay; inflame the divisions in society. The investigations, growing mistrust, and disillusionment alone may be enough to topple it and subvert democracy without any true crime ever being proven.

[Hemaworstje]

yes, it's hard to keep the lid on a bucket filled with messy things
( which War is ), and much more to come, that is journalism showing both sides, that is news , that's entertainment, offcourse its prepublished in a sleezy paper before hitting the public broadcast ,offcourse the timing is perfect , etc etc, that is media.
Consequences following by the publishment can't be blames on the aussi's.
What are y gonna do? buy no more Aussi food, cartoons?
The new UN ******* speaks very clearly about Guantanamo ,the pictures are from 2003 , the ******* is fresh.
The punishements following the first pictures have been ridiculously low to my point of view, what is Lyndie doing nowaday's?

[babydave]

it is not OLD new. These are the pictures the Administration fought tooth and nail not to show the public.

yes they shouldve released them at the time but it is old. its from the same period as the previous photos, if they were dated 2005,2006 then it would be new,but theyre not.

[joedirt]

check out www.salon.com they got a hold of all of the pictures and posted some never before seen before

http://salon.com/news/feature/2006/02/16/abu_ghraib/