Comments on: Prisoner Abuse Photos Will Not Be Released

By: Chris H

Chris H — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 18:10:43 +0000

How is it a “new wave” of propaganda if it is true? That the world knows there is more to the story and we refuse to tell all is what allows the propaganda to continue. The unknown is a much greater recruiting tool than the known, unless of course what the images that are being withheld depict is much worse than has been released.

That Manadel al-Jamadi was tortured to death while a suspect (read no due process) and no one has been convicted of any wrong doing has to leave people suspect of what went on. The Iraqis have a right to demand a pound of flesh, releasing the information is a pittance in comparison.

And Travis, there is no blind yelling of liberty. I’ve recounted specific instances where our government has been used to enact the exact actions for which it was founded to protect. That you fail to recognize this perversion is sick. You have no value of life, you have no value for truth. What do you value? Your temporary security and comfort above all else? If that’s the case, it will indeed be temporary.

By: Travis Gearhart

Travis Gearhart — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 14:10:47 +0000

Thank you Laurie and Kevin! Finally, its like talking to a brick wall here!

Chris, its been real, but I’m mooovin’ on my friend. You seem to completely ignore whole paragraphs at a time and miss the points completely. I certainly didn’t say that I thought sodomization with a broom handle was appropriate (in fact there are several times in the past convos that I said it WASN’T appropriate) and if you read my statement that said if they WERE GIVEN A CHANCE to rape and murder your family they would as me worrying about some Pakistinian dude actually coming over and doing it, you need to work on your reading comprehension skills. Thanks for showing me yet another person who blindly yells “Liberty!” and gets aroused by Ron Pauls photo.

By: kevintracy

kevintracy — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 11:13:08 +0000

I’m usually a fan of information dissemination, but Laurie is right. There is no need for the world population to see more of what they have already seen. Especially when such things will only serve to inspire a new wave of enemy propaganda.

Were stupid things done that shouldn’t have been done? Absolutely. But do we need to see more evidence of these stupid things when everybody already knows what stupid things were done? No.

Many, many years from now – when all of this has boiled over and Americans and Arabs both are living under the same oppressive global regime of an unchecked China; maybe we can look back at this stuff and laugh. But until that day comes, there’s no purpose in releasing the additional evidence.

By: Laurie

Laurie — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 05:32:47 +0000

Normally, I’d let my card-carrying ACLU freak flag fly, but I tend to agree with Travis on this one. I respect the ACLU for fighting the good fight and keeping an eye on the big issue, but I also respect Gates and the Obama administration for doing the exact same thing on this issue. The abuse, and some of the aggregious photos depicting it, was exposed in full view of the American people. What’s the value in releasing further photos which have been described as “more of the same and in duplicate”? What’s the harm? Like it or not, these quesitons take precedent over the public’s right to see more of the same, unless a prominent political figure is one of the players or they show us once and for all who REALLY killed Kennedy.

By: Chris H

Chris H — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 01:53:42 +0000

There was more torture going on there than just waterboarding as those in the video can attest to. If you don’t think sodomy by a broom stick is torture…can’t wait for your video on that.

What would Chris do? First, Chris would declare war as a prerequisite of taking prisoners of war. From there, prisoners of war are to be detained if and only if they were captured on a battlefield, where they surrendered. They are to be held until such time as hostilities cease. In no event are they to be tortured!

If they are otherwise captured for crimes, they are to be tried for those crimes.

You are pretty dense to be more afraid of a man in Pakistan raping and killing your wife and child, then you are of your government doing that to you.

By: Travis Gearhart

Travis Gearhart — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 00:49:03 +0000

I know who was waterboarded, as you call torture, because of the CIA documents that were released. It does matter who has rights and who doesn’t, and quite frankly my rights to live in America and protect my own trump those of extremeists who want to rape my wife and kill my son. So if you care more about people like that, great! Also, great if those 30 have been set for release because they didn’t do anything! However, if they show back up on the battle field (as many have) and kill more Americans, you know, those most sane people really give a sh*t about, I’ll be the first to say I told you so. Let me ask you this Chris, since you dodged it in my last question, what exactly would you like them to do? Shall we not detain anyone? Should we just forget all about terrorism and just say meh, whatever. Much of what we have been talking about may not be the best way to handle the situation, so let me know! What would Chris do?

By: Chris H

Chris H — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 21:46:33 +0000

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vm-tFt3Itoc

By: Chris H

Chris H — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 21:34:59 +0000

How would you know if an American were being held at Guantanamo or anywhere else? It’s called extraordinary rendition for a reason. And what does their country of origin matter in the discussion? Are only American men created equal? Are the rights of life and liberty only unalienable if you’re an American? I don’t profess that it is our responsibility to secure those rights for those outside of our control, but when they are within our control, it is the purpose of our government’s existence that those rights be secured and protected.

The detainees at Guatanamo are just now even able to challenge their detention…seven and eight years after the fact. How would you know who torture was restricted to? They don’t video tape the interrogations.

Oh…and just yesterday…30 more at GITMO ordered released for lack of evidence
http://news.bostonherald.com/news/national/general/view/20091115judges_order_release_of_30_from_gitmo/srvc=home&position=recent

By: Travis Gearhart

Travis Gearhart — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 18:32:09 +0000

So which Americans is this happening to, Chris? I understand your argument, I understand the distrust of government. But what Americans are being picked up and locked up? None that I’ve seen, and if there are by all means, let me know. If anything this country hasn’t been paying close enough attention to signs that there will be an attack by extremeists (Fort Hood). And maybe it is over .1%! Like I wrote above, by all means, if there is an innocent man locked up find out if he is innocent and release him. Innocent people weren’t, however, waterboarded. That was restricted to only the top officials. You’re putting an awful lot of faith in the word of some locked up people that they are innocent. Guess what? Everybody on Cell Block C in any prison will tell you that they are innocent, as well.

By: Chris

Chris — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 14:50:45 +0000

That’s the friggin point. The ONLY thing that separates YOU from that .1% (it’s a larger number than that, but the principle holds if you accept that .1% are there wrongly) is no one is accusing YOU of having information. If someone were to suggest that you have some insider knowledge of some fictitious bomb plot, you would be kidnapped, renditioned and tortured before you could face those accusations.

I am not speaking lowly of our military. The military is at all times subordinate to a civilian authority. I am speaking lowly of that civilian authority who created a lottery policy of ‘Cash for Muslims’ in a country that has lower than a 50% adult literacy rate.