Patterico's Pontifications

11/16/2009

Administration: Releasing Photos of Abused Prisoners Would Endanger Our Soldiers

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:06 am



The AP reports:

Defense Secretary Robert Gates has blocked the public release of any more pictures of foreign detainees abused by their U.S. captors, saying their release would endanger American soldiers.

This is just another attempt by the Bush administration to paper over its history of state-sanctioned abuse with a ludicrous argument that releasing details of the torture of prisoners would somehow . . .

Just one second.

. . . I’m being informed that Barack Obama is now the president, and this action was actually taken by the Obama administration.

Never mind!

38 Responses to “Administration: Releasing Photos of Abused Prisoners Would Endanger Our Soldiers”

  1. well, Gates *was* appointed by Bush. now they can throw him under the bus and appoint someone more Ear Leader’s style as SecDef….

    i’m thinking Jane Fonda.

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  2. Thanks Patterico… now I have to wipe down my monitor, keyboard and desk.

    GM Roper (85dcd7)

  3. Frankly, I am surprised this administration had the guts to make such a decision. I now find my self in a position where I actually agree with two things this president as done. This decision and calling Kanye West a “jackass.”,

    Hondo (eb6164)

  4. So Obama is continuing Bush policies and the “nutroots” as you call them, are angry. Why are you complaining?

    bored again (d80b5a)

  5. I guess it all depends on which end of the broomstick you’re on.

    nk (df76d4)

  6. Bored again is so funny. He misses the point entirely: he and his ilk were infuriated by GWB doing exactly the same thing.

    But…but…but…that was different!

    What is the truth is this POTUS lied like a Turkish rug to get votes.

    Oh, but everyone does it?

    Eric Blair (711059)

  7. That’s right. Making things tough on a Republican President is the “public’s right to know.”

    Wouldn’t want to make things hard on the Obama administration.

    I certainly agree with the decision…it just woulda been nice if they’d made the same one last time.

    Steve B (5eacf6)

  8. It is simply not possible that bored again could miss every point on accident.

    JD (7419af)

  9. “he and his ilk were infuriated by GWB doing exactly the same thing.
    But…but…but… ”
    But Bush or Obama the policy is wrong. The people who were angry then are angry now.

    What is it you don’t get?

    bored again (d80b5a)

  10. Oh, I don’t know. Could it be Sat… Obama and his admin team were among the angry ones and spoke out loudly about it?

    John Hitchcock (3fd153)

  11. Oh, I get you, bored. JAT. I doubt you study anything deeply. You just snark, because that is what you are about.

    Just sour electrons.

    Eric Blair (711059)

  12. “Obama and his admin team were among the angry ones and spoke out loudly about it?”

    So they played to their base and moved right, as cynics knew they would.

    But on some other day, or another post on this site Obama is still an evil man trying to destroy the country!! A socialist!! Who shows no respect for the military!
    ….zzzzzzzz.

    bored again (d80b5a)

  13. What is it you don’t get?

    Comment by bored again

    You, troll. Nobody could be this unselfaware. I think it is a bot.

    Mike K (2cf494)

  14. bored again, Obama doesn’t represent any moral principles. Either he really thinks it’s wrong to do what he’s doing, or he doesn’t. He’s just not ready to lead yet.

    I don’t understand why democrats lump together all the criticism of Obama, from a variety of points of view, and point to that as some kind of proof that there’s some kind of hypocrisy out there. Lots of people want Obama to keep his promises, and are upset that he broke them. Lots of people want Obama to be an actual leader in our war. Those views don’t agree, but so what?

    Obama’s the one who tried to be all things to all people, running as a Republican tax cutter, war fighter, deficit cutter, while also running as a social spender from Acorn who would end every Bush policy. This is what happens when you promise the MTV crowd everything… they eventually realize that you were lying.

    Dustin (bb61e3)

  15. That’s common sense at work. I have great respect for Robert Gates. A plus for Obama.

    The Emperor whose birthday is today. (82e13a)

  16. How many US troops taken prisoner by jihadists have been murdered while being videotaped for propaganda purposes?

    firefirefire (81ecb9)

  17. “Obama doesn’t represent any moral principles.”

    Democrats have moral principles. If putting stuff about Abu Ghraib in the news helps their political fortunes, then they’re in favor of putting it in the news. If they think it’ll hurt their fortunes, then they’re against it.

    Whether it will hurt the country or not isn’t relevant, but what’s good for America isn’t part of their moral code.

    But, then it never has been. In the old days Democrats were all for America…as long they could own slaves. If they couldn’t, then they turned traitor.

    Same thing now.

    Dave Surls (91bc82)

  18. “How many US troops and civilians taken prisoner by jihadists have been murdered while being videotaped for propaganda purposes?”

    There, fixed that for you.

    AD - RtR/OS! (785778)

  19. Just a disgusting decision by Secretary Gates and the Congress who gave him the legal authority to ignore FOIA and those rascally courts.

    It is amusing that the Right thinks it’s okay to torture people, but wrong to see pictures of it. It’s brilliant hypocrisy: if it’s right to torture A-rabs, then why the hell do y’all care if anyone sees it?

    timb (449046)

  20. firefirefire and AD – It would be a lot easier to ask how many Americans captured by Jihadis have NOT been killed. As near as I can recall the answer is at most one. The fate of the soldier captured/wandered away from his unit in Afghanistan is still not known.

    Have Blue (854a6e)

  21. “It is amusing that the Right thinks it’s okay to torture people”

    It’s amusing that the Left thinks it’s o.k. to fry a hundred thousand Japanese men, women and children at Hiroshima one day, and then moan about Abu Ghraib the next.

    Dave Surls (91bc82)

  22. “if it’s right to torture A-rabs”

    Depends on what A-Rab your torturing.

    If it’s o.k. to burn a totally innocent two year old Japanese girl alive with napalm or atomic bombs, it’s gotta be o.k. to cut Khalid Sheikh’s balls off.

    At least that’s the way I see it.

    I know you liberal Democrat types see it differently.

    Dave Surls (91bc82)

  23. Defense Secretary Robert Gates has blocked the public release of any more pictures of foreign detainees abused by their U.S. captors, saying their release would endanger American soldiers.

    Yeah?

    Wait until the trial. We’re going to see loads of pictures. We’re going to see LOADS of pictures of detainees “tortured” by Bush.

    Then when a mistrial is declared and it becomes apparent that KSM cannot receive a fair trial since he was tortured by Bush, the intent of this farce will be unveiled- to place George Bush on trial in the Hague for war crimes.

    drjohn (488550)

  24. drjohn – that’s the first thing that came to my mind.

    I hate that I’m becoming such a cynic.

    em (11cf60)

  25. Surly, sweet of you to feign concern over those 2 year olds and not give nearly as much concern to the Iraqi, Afghan, and Pakistani two year olds who are dying now or in the last 6 years….didn’t the Defense Department estimate 128,000 civilian deaths in Iraq? Wow, that’s more than Hiroshima or Nagasaki.

    Who knew Surly was a closet peace-nik who opposed the A-bomb attacks?

    timb (449046)

  26. In prosecuting a War ethically one must inflict maximum suffering as quickly as possible in order to end the conflict as soon as possible. The Goal being making the inevitable as clear as possible to the enemy. You surrender or die, all of you, women and children too.

    The A-Bomb was not only just, it saved lives in the long run for both countries. These concerns over babies and children is mis-placed when discussing war. More people die and suffer from dragging out armed conflict then from ending with extreme prejudice.

    This point does not put into dispute the just use of war to achieve policy objectives.

    So, while it may have been “unjust” to invade Iraq, once in it. Win at all costs as soon as possible.

    HeavenSent (01a566)

  27. timb, you are making up stuff yet again – there is no such estimate from the Defense Department.

    Why does everyone on the Left think its a good idea to make up stuff and lie? I guess making up stuff substitutes for adult behavior for you and your ilk.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  28. … and may I add,in spite of prosecuting a war in a barbaric manner it is also important the losing side understand peace is attainable and the goal is not extermination but subjugation to a clear set of goals.

    You must be a democracy.
    You must disarm totally.
    You must allow us to run your country ….

    But anyway….

    HeavenSent (01a566)

  29. “Surly, sweet of you to feign concern over those 2 year olds…”

    Now, now, wee lil lefty, don’t start telling lies. I didn’t express any concern for them. Just pointing out what double-dealing, lying scumbags liberal Democrats are.

    Burning innocent Japanese babies alive with jellied gasoline o.k. (if a Democrat hero orders it).

    Bitch-slapping a not one bit innocent murdering Al Qaida terrorist around Gitmo, not o.k. (if a hated Republican orders it).

    Democrats = treasonous scum who only moan about atrocities when they think it will win them an election…not surprising, since about 99.9% of atrocities are carried out by the Dems…or at least take place when they’re minding the store.

    Same thing when it comes to covering up atrocities. Democrats only think about how it’s going to affect them, never would they put America’s interest first, and they damn sure wouldn’t put the interest of our troops first.

    If an atrocity like the Dachau massacre or My Lai takes place, and they can’t dress it up to make it palatable (like they were able to do with DELIBERATELY slaughtering Japanese civilians during WWII), then they cover it up. And, it stays covered up until it won’t hurt the Dems politically (Dachau massacre) or until they can use it to hurt the Republicans (My Lai)…and to hell with whether or not that’s going to put the lives of our troops in danger.

    Of course, if it’s a much lesser atrocity, and a Republican is president, as in the case of Abu Ghraib and Bush, they want it all over the front pages, so they can use it to attack the Republicans, and, like I said, to hell with whether or not that’s going to hurt the troops.

    And that situation lasts until one of their boys (’cause you sure can’t call them men) gets elected…THEN they start getting all worried about the troops, and it’s “mums the word” time again.

    Dave Surls (f225d6)

  30. But Bush or Obama the policy is wrong. The people who were angry then are angry now.

    Like hell they’re angry – let’s see the 24/7 organized protests across the country for the next 3 years, replete with the giant paper mache’ heads calling Obama the world torturer, the Hitlerian overlord that’s going to imprison us all. Until that happens, STFU.

    Dmac (a964d5)

  31. For those of you who don’t know what the Dachau massacre was;US troops lined up Nazi death camp guards against a wall after the camp was liberated and executed them without a trial.
    No US troops were ever brought to trial for the killings.
    Harry Truman (D) was president.

    firefirefire (81ecb9)

  32. debunker’s gonna get debunked in 5,4,3,2,1

    DOD report to Congress

    Estimates of civilian deaths reported per month (hint: see page 29) from 2006 to 2008.

    Here’s a Congressional Research Service report using DOD estimates from 2004 to May 2006.

    So, while technically correct that the DOD has willfully kept these numbers from the American public, their estimates are available through their reports to Congress and the Congressional Research Service….bunch of lefties.**

    You have been debunked.

    **Although it is cute that the “second-hand smoke doesn’t exist” crowd apparently believes no civilians have died in Iraq. Because, that seems to be your counter-argument.

    I was making a point about Surly’s disdain for present day children and you responded to that with “there are no DOD numbers.” Since “there are no DOD numbers” is your argument, are you saying there are no causalities!?!?

    If not, you took a tiny point of argument and attempted to invalidate the entire argument based on your own mis-perception of the facts. (see above)

    Or, is it more likely, you are just quibbling with numbers because you’re a partisan hack who doesn’t like me?

    Let me know, rqps. I am just dying to know whether you are a nitpicking pain in the bum or a jackass who bases his disagreement on personalities. Either you’re a “miss the forest for the trees” kind of fellow or…well, you’re a 13 year old girl.

    timb (449046)

  33. Hell, fire, I heard he flew there and personally pulled the trigger. In my case, I went back in time when i declared my party affiliation in a special Democrat time machine and shot three myself with good ol’ Harry S.

    Just a moronic point by both of you

    timb (449046)

  34. Surly, you kook, blaming me for things that happened before I was born is like me blaming your South Carolina living self for secession and the Civil War.

    It may shock you to note that the people who opposed knighting war criminal Major “Bomber” Harris and also think Curtis LeMay was a war criminal include me. We agree on something!

    Whereas, you weirdly oppose the bombing of Tokyo on partisan grounds; I have always found it disgusting on human grounds.

    As for this,

    …hurt the Republicans (My Lai)…

    Republicans were hurt by My Lai because they embraced Calley. Nixon himself oversaw the commutation of his sentence and his transfer to house arrest. You can read about his involvement here. Also, you can read about how the American public supported Calley during his trail, especially conservative Republicans who made sure he had a job when he was released and supported abysmal total of 3 and half years served.

    Here’s a hint, if you don’t want to be blamed for coddling mass murderers, then don’t coddle them.

    PS This leaves aside the sheer inanity of an argument that blames either LBJ or Nixon for My Lai. Neither of them ordered it nor would have wanted it. in the end, only one of them embraced its guilty Lieutenant and helped reduce his sentence.

    timb (449046)

  35. SPQR – Where did you argue that there have been no civilian deaths?

    JD (331ad2)

  36. SPQR – Where did you argue that there have been no civilian deaths?

    dj looks at a point sailing over his head and feigns ignorance.

    Makes one wonder if the points sail over his head because he cannot make or have an honest discussion and thus is sitting down while complaining points go over his head or if he’s just stupid and can’t understand ANY argument?

    timb (449046)

  37. [waiting for next jd post which asks “when did I ever argue I was sitting down]

    timb (449046)

  38. You are so cute when you are full of anger and hate and arrogance and pomposity and unwarranted superiority. And, you are creepy.

    JD (ab0fe5)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0870 secs.