President Obama, Release Those Photos
I am disappointed in President Obama's decision to block the release of photos from Abu Ghraib and elsewhere. I don't know what else to say. The notion that troops are put at risk because regional tensions will be inflamed doesn't jibe with me. The President, as a candidate, promised an open government when it comes to these matters. The troops can't be used as a fig leaf to break a promise.
Release those photos. History demands it.
Advertisement
Recommended, although I disagree with your viewpoint, Zipperupus. Mine runs along similar lines as JEP07 and Deanie Mills.
Still, it's important for all sides to be heard and I have much respect for you as a blogger.
May 13, 2009 9:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Disagreement is as important as agreement as long as both are based on respect. And I respect and value your presence ans opinions in all matters. Gos bless.
May 13, 2009 10:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
They should also be based upon FACT AND EVIDENCE. We get all the other kind of "opinion" from the far-right lunatic fringe nihilists who reject the "quaint" notion of "truth".
.
May 14, 2009 1:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good pose and recommended although I pretty much agree with what flowerchild said. my views are with Deanie Mills and JEP07. But still it's important to debate and hear both sides of the issues. That we can agree on.
May 13, 2009 9:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama has not 'blocked the release', he asked DOJ attorneys to argue not to release them at this time, in the American system, the judge and the judicial system will rule if and when they will be released in this case brought by the ACLU.
May 14, 2009 12:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
I believe your right on that Noble regsrding Obama and the DOJ attorneys. Speaking of that. When will be the date where this case will be heard? Is there a set date yet? I'm dying to know so we can get this settled.
May 14, 2009 12:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama has reneged on his promise last month to release the photos. Thus, he has blocked their release with his flip flop.
May 14, 2009 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, this should have been a reply to noblecommentdcider above.
May 14, 2009 1:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
He didn't reneg on a "promise." That's complete nonsense. The DOJ said it would release the photos. Obama then looked at the issue, and felt there was a concern it might not have any utility beyond sensationalism becasue Americans are already well aware of the torture, and that it would be propaganda used against us in the Arab world. Therefore, he asked DoJ to make that argument, as he didn't feel that had been addressed yet.
Which I agree with.
These photos are not like Abu Graib, which broke the story. They don't have value to forther inform the public, they're just mass media torture porn, which is sick.
Also, we don't have Bush/Cheney continuing torture, where sensational photos have useful propaganda value in stopping an ongoing process. Obama has already shut this down.
Lastly, at any point if the DoJ and Obama Admin want to pursue prosecution of the policy makers, Yoo and such, they can always be released then.
At present, there's nothing to be accomplished by releasing them, and it would only be used as propaganda against efforts in Afghanistan and generally in the Arab world.
May 14, 2009 1:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually they would have the OPPOSITE effect: it would be viewed as a voluntary coming-clean -- with POSITIVE consequences.
May 14, 2009 1:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, it wouldn't have. Not in much of the Arab world, it would jest be more fodder for satellite TV. It might not even be clear to many that it was done in the past and isn't ongoing.
Furthermore, your whole notion of "coming clean" is rooted in our culture and Christianity in particular. In much of the Arab Muslim world where we have ongoing battles or where the Taliban may recruit, they have a vengeance/honor system. You don't forgive, you get even.
May 14, 2009 2:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have no idea what the reality is on the ground -- except as expressed by Arabs in the Middle East.
Neither do you; all you are doing is repeating right-wing propaganda (which never says anything about the obvious vengefulness of the right-wing, and Israel) which is the excuse for calling Arabs names.
May 14, 2009 2:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, yes, I have read a great deal about it, and while I'd not presume to be an expert, I know enough to make the comments above.
And yes, it is important to consider the consequences in the Arab world, becasue we have ongoining wars and alliances there.
If you can't relate to that then maybe you should reserve judgment, as you're blind to an important part of the equation and your opinion is incomplete.
May 14, 2009 2:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
To be clear, I'm not not referring to middle class, moderate Arabs in developed countries. I'm talking about the sort or militant, fundamentalists that may already be sympathetic to the Taliban, and for whom more photos would be a great recruiting tool and good for morale in continuing to fight on.
And again, considering we already know about torture, it's mentioned in the news every day, and considering these programs are shut down, Abu Ghraib is closed, Guantanamo is closing, etc. I don't see any value to more media torture porn.
May 14, 2009 2:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have no idea whether there is an "Arab middle class" as USians understand that term. Or otherwise. Neither do you. You are substituting -- projecting -- your lack of knowledge for realities you do not know.
The "militants" you jabber about are a tiny minority. And the recruitment by them has slowed with the positive response to Obama's overtures. Continuing to come-clean will only further that constructive two-way effort.
"Torture porn"? Could be; but it is reality, and it is evidence. How much and often do the media make of whatever is happening into one or antoher sort of "porn"?
Do you want to prosecute the perpetrators? If so, how do we overcome the resistance to that if not by revealing the depravities and their extremity for what they are: a picture says a thousand words.
May 14, 2009 2:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes actually, I do know that, and yes there is. I'd thank you not to presume everyone is as uninformed as you are.
And actually you;re presuming to know how the Arab world would react right down thread. So apparently you're just making this stuff up as you go along and can't even be consistent.
Anyway, debating you is a waste of time becasue you obviously aren't processing any of this intelligently and just cobbling together inconsistent ad hoc arguments.
Just another internet opinionator I guess.
May 14, 2009 2:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Somehow, I believe Prof. Turley agrees that the President has reneged. He uses the term "by reversing it's earlier statement" as opposed to reneged.
Look at what he said about this last night on Rachel Maddow's show:
Turley: "The problem with having a lot more pictures is that it complete disassembles our previous arguments about Abu Ghraib. We protrayed a small group of peoples as hicks with sticks. And we knew they weren't... What these other photographs indicate... the idea that they were rogue operators is obviously wrong, if there are hundreds of other photos where they weren't involved."
"I think that the ACLU will ultimately prevail, and maybe that's what the Obama administration wants politically, is to be forced to release these photos as a political measure, but by doing this, by putting in this fight, by reversing it's earlier statement to the court, it makes a mockery of the system, it makes a mockery of this country."
May 14, 2009 2:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow. That's a very generous parsing of the English language. He didn't "block" them - he just initiated court proceedings to keep them from being released as scheduled.
May 14, 2009 10:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
Right. There's been a lot of sloppy thinking on this.
Some people on the left have said Obama is using "Bushisms" which I find a bit ridiculous. This is not Bush, not 2004, we're not continuing torture, and the public is already well aware of torture. Things are very different now. The utility of torture photos to raise issue awareness is very different now, from then.
What has remained the same: releasing photos hurts our image and national security becasue they have propaganda value to enemies, and a hindrance to our allies. The Pakistani military is attempting to put down a Taliban insurgency with our aid, as we speak.
It's a very different cost/benefit analysis now. The things that can benefit by releasing the photos have already changed. The costs to releasing them have remained, or even become worse.
May 14, 2009 1:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here is my mailer today from Romero;
---
Dear ACLU Supporter,
Hours ago, the Obama administration disappointingly reversed its promise to make public photos depicting detainee abuse by U.S. personnel overseas. The Department of Defense recently told a federal judge that it would release a “substantial number” of photos in response to a court ruling in an ACLU Freedom of Information Act lawsuit.
There is no doubt that these photos would be disturbing. The day we are no longer upset by such repugnant acts would be a sad one. But, the outrage related to these photos shouldn’t be about their release. It should be about the horrific crimes that they depict. And, we must demand accountability for the widespread abuse they document.
The very fact that these photos exist only underscores the need for accountability and for a full investigation of crimes committed. As President Obama said on his first full day in office, “A democracy requires accountability, and accountability requires transparency.”
The ACLU pressed for the recent release of the long-secret Bush torture memos and is now calling for the release of the abuse photos because -- as painful as it is -- confronting the evidence of what was done is essential if we are to live by the law.
Those who turned a blind eye to abuse and those who put the despicable U.S. torture program in place had no right to ignore the rule of law.
And, no matter how hard some might try to turn us away from the facts, we also have no right to ignore the rule of law. We have to call to account those who did this and follow the evidence wherever it leads.
Sooner or later, these photos will come to light. And when they do, you and I will be heartbroken and sick to our stomachs to see so vividly what the U.S. torture program entailed.
But, the real heartbreak -- the real betrayal of our values and principles -- would come if we denied our moral and legal responsibility to bring to account those who involved our country in torture so horrid that we hesitate to even look it in the eye.
The President is listening to and weighing carefully the advice of those in his administration on these issues. But he also needs to hear from concerned citizens like you.
The debate about the release of these photos will continue in the courts, and the ACLU will be there to argue for transparency and to insist that a democracy thrives on the free flow of information.
I urge you to act on your deepest beliefs about what kind of country we are. Join the ACLU in calling on President Obama to put the full weight of his leadership behind our call for transparency and accountability.
Tell President Obama you support transparency and accountability at the highest levels of government.
http://action.aclu.org/site/R?i=pVdCB4Zyf1IZdnGJjExB-A..
Sincerely,
Anthony D. Romero
Executive Director
ACLU
P.S. We’re talking about issues of fundamental importance to our core beliefs. Please share this email with as many people as possible.
© ACLU, 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10004
May 14, 2009 1:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
I usually support the ACLU mission, but they are a hammer seeking nails and see themselves essentially as attorneys representing a client unwaveringly. Their client, the principle, dictates they always push for releases. They can't be expected to ever acknowledge that some withholding of sensational images is appropriate.
See up thread why in this case I think there's a lot of faux-liberal knee jerking, and Obama got it right.
May 14, 2009 1:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Unless this is some kind of backspinning counter-balance to a coming proclamation from Obama that there is no option but a Special Prosecutor for the Bush Torture Program, Obama is wrong to cave in to Washington insiders.
No, wait. He's wrong even if counterbalancing.
The one redeeming dynamic this administration launched right out of the gate - the reversal of the Bush Regime war-without-rules on anything that might be gihadist - and the critical undercut that provides for keeping multitudes of Islamics out of the extremist tent, is quickly eviscerated when he starts hedging on that reversal.
The world believed he was serious about change from the reviled Bush. Now it will brand him a status-quo liar, if he's cast in overseas press today as covering Bush crimes up.
...oh, they'll come out later on sometime?
Justice delayed, justice denied.
May 14, 2009 2:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think you're right on! It's obvious, however, as evidenced by all the folks willing to buy this bill of goods from Obama that we have a major league double standard going on.
May 14, 2009 1:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
You don't know a whole lot about the intersection of politics and aw, do you?
Or how due process shouldn't be jeopardized by either turture-produced evidence, or prejudicing of prosecution in favor of the defendants.
Obama included the latter issue as one of his reasons. Do you want Bushit-Cheney prosecuted? Or do you want them not prosecuted because of adverse pre-trial publicity?
May 14, 2009 1:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
"aw" should be "law"
May 14, 2009 2:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm sorry, but it's appears you are simply making excuses because it's your guy who is being criticized.
All the issues Obama has brought up defending his flip flop have already been adjudicated and the government has lost at every turn. I repeat: all of the issues the President raised yesterday have already been adjudicated and the government has lost on every one of them. That's due process.
The President's position last month was that it was "hopeless" to appeal. The flip flop is simply a means of delay if there was any merit at all in the Presdent's position last month.
May 14, 2009 2:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think we can be completely assured, that ACLU principals want to take down Bush Regime violators. During the Dark Era of the Plame scandal and FISA law violations, it was about the only reed standing firm. That's when I started sending it money (not a lot...)
If there was a legitimate prosecutorial jeopardy involved in releasing the photos, wouldn't Romero see it also?
May 14, 2009 3:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Unfortunately, your view is not looking at the whole picture - no pun intended.
Obama does have an open government. How is actually showing the pictures doing to make things more "clear". All it will do is inflame and set things back.
Obama could very easily seal the documents to be opened in 50 years time. "History demands it"? As long as the docs aren't destroyed, history is not being denied.
There is little real value to releasing the photos and very real damage that could occur.
It's time to get a bit more sophisticated and consider the large issues at hand. Obama is a master of this.
May 14, 2009 2:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Obama does have an open government. How is actually showing the pictures doing to make things more "clear". All it will do is inflame and set things back."
I just want to start by thanking you for your civility.
I do not believe he has an open government. I believe it is more open than the last administration, but that isn't a fair comparison. Moving to block a court order is not an example of open government.
How are the pictures going to make things more clear? Given the supposed content of the photos, it would contradict claims on the right that what happened were merely "enhanced techniques" or "fraternity pranks." Additionally, there may be personnel such as officers or contractors that would reveal the lie that it is a few bad apples... instead it would likely reveal an SOP that was initiated at a much higher echelon of the chain of command. Finally, the release would cement public support for investigations and prosecutions for those who wrote and implemented human rights violations that make us no better than our enemies.
"There is little real value to releasing the photos and very real damage that could occur"
That is Bush-speak. The threat of danger always trumps the value of truth. I do believe there is a diplomatic approach that could be taken that would vitiate much of the potential threat. I have faith and trust in the abilities of President Obama and his State Department to calm the region in the wake of the release.
"Obama could very easily seal the documents to be opened in 50 years time. "History demands it"? As long as the docs aren't destroyed, history is not being denied."
There is historical value in the timely release of these documents. The CIA, for example, sat on damning documentation involving the destabilization of the Allende government in Chile followed by the support of the Pinochet regime. This destabilization was funded covertly at the behest of ITT in order to secure rights to copper mines. If these documents were released in the immediate aftermath of these events, they would not have fallen down the memory hole. As long as events are put in a time capsule to be released later, there is a clear trend in public perception that the United States no longer commits these acts. What is established is a leapfrogging mechanism where the truth is delayed until it loses its sting.
If your family or friends were to be revealed in these phots, would you want that evidence bottled up for 50 years? I would not. I would want the government to obey the court order.
"It's time to get a bit more sophisticated and consider the large issues at hand. Obama is a master of this."
I believe that I have considered the large issues at hand... you and I happen to disagree on how these large issues should be handled.
Is Obama a master of this? I am not sure. I have seen the depth of his strategy over the course of a two year period, but this is the big time... the kind of history that is written in the texts and stays relevant. Right now I liken Obama to Claudius after the strange and terrible reign of Nero, making decisions at the behest of the Praetorian Guard but with the necessary decorum that satisfied the plebs.
May 14, 2009 11:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
"I do not believe he has an open government. I believe it is more open than the last administration, but that isn't a fair comparison. Moving to block a court order is not an example of open government."
An appeal is not a "block".
And thre's a resal fundamental Constitutional issue involved, with which you seem unacquainted: separation of powers.
First, the effort to prevent the photos being released was initiated by the Bushit criminal enterprise. That put the decision outside the Executive into the Judiciary.
Second, the Executive has no control over the actions of the Judiciary. All that happened was that the Judiciary ruled in favor of the ACLU FOIA suit. And all the Executive branch did was maintain the Bushit course of conduct WITHIN THE JUDICIARY. It is probably his assessment that the appellate court will afirm the lower court's decision, and taht will be the end of the Bushit-initiated effort to prevent release of the photographs.
It's the right approach legally. And politically: "I didn't order them released. I simply complied with a court order requiring that they be released."
All of which is above board.
In addition, a reason Obama is doing as he is was explained by him: he doesn't want to prejudice the case with "pretrial publicity" if that can be avoided.
The man is a lawyer, a Constitutional scholar, and a former law professor. He is sophisticated, sharp, and no fool. EVERY president is concerned with his "legacy" -- including Obama. You don't REALLY believe he wants the stain you impute on his "resume" in history, do you?
May 14, 2009 2:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Large post Zipperupus. I likewise contend the release can be managed under the heading of "Truth is King", bolstering Obama's initial moral high ground on the world stage instead of (now) undermining it. If we do not drive a wedge between rational, moderate Islamics and gihad lunatics - if we don't take their recruitment poster down - we will set up a never-ending cycle of attack & retaliation ala Israel/Palestine. Except, it will amount to WWIII
I likewise contend the photos may coalesce for Americans, what they are dazed on now by Cheney's propaganda: Torture is insanity and we must of necessity cover this, per our system of justice, as a nation of laws.
May 14, 2009 4:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
It isn't the images that cause the hatred. It was the behavior. The pictures are already out there. Everyone knows what we did. Repressing the pictures won't change anything as far as troop safety is concerned.
We allowed our generals to absolve themselves of all blame. As a result Abuses continued long after Abu Ghraib - and may continue to this day. Even though we've been largely kept in the dark, I'd be willing to bet the Iraqis on the street know full well. What will keep our troops safe is a demonstration of the American will to see the abuse they suffered punished in a real way - that Obama intends to honor his oath as president in this regard.
Oh that's right ... I forgot Grainer and Englund were convicted - justice done! If we realize that's bullshit, don't you think maybe the folks in the Middle East realize it too?
The President has already said he'll block criminal investigations, that there shouldn't be a truth commission, and nobody should see any charges. These pictures are important in helping the American people determine what crimes were committed at which facilities and give us the information necessary to empower or reps. to demand more action. There is a huge lie going on right now - that torture and abuse resultant from the Bybee and derivative memos was limited to three high-value detainees. These pictures - from an array of facilities, many of them officially showing sanctioned behavior, will end that debate.
By fighting the release, Obama simply undercuts the small amount of credibility he has won in the Islamic world. That leaves our troops in a far worse position strategically if our goal is a positive outcome from current military engagements.
May 14, 2009 11:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yours is an excellent comment. I emphatically agree. I was part of the RCT-5 investigation into the Haditha killings... the local population was very aware that those who were ultimately responsible for the coverup would not see justice. I can not stress enough the savvy of the Iraqi people... they grew up in a regime that fell into and out of favor with the US and fought a protracted war with Iran. Their grasp of justice and its corruption by the elites is superior to the average American.
Honestly, I do see an uptick in violence coming from this delay. The message to the Middle East is that Obama is paying lip service to the region but has no intention of making changes. And I wouldn't blame them for the conclusion.
May 14, 2009 12:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with your tenor. The release of the photos would have a POSITIVE result, as those in the Middle East who were victimized by the tortures will view it as a voluntary coming-clean. It will be a total breath of fresh air to them and the world to see the US actually stand by its principles, not only in word but also in deed.
The appelate court will likely afirm the loawer court, and the Executive will have no choice but to comply with the court's order to release them.
It's an opportunity, actually, to see how things are intended to be done, in contrast to the Bushit effort to stack the judiciary with lackies who would subvert separation of powers for ideological "reasons".
May 14, 2009 2:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wait, right up thread you're saying you don;t know about Arab culture, and in this post you apparently think you do. I think maybe you're just seeing what you want to believe.
Moderate Arabs might appreciate the coming clean, but we've already done that. I really don't think militants will see it as anything more than another reason to hate us.
As analogy imagine photos turn up from past affairs, long after a cheating spouse has already come clean, pledged to never cheat again, and become loyal. How will the spouse who was cheated on respond? A calm/forgiving person still might not want to see them, just becasue they're painful. A person who was really violent already might see them and forget the forgiveness, and reach for a meat cleaver.
I really don't see anything good from releasing more photos at this point.
May 14, 2009 2:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
No one's "come clean", it's being dragged out, tooth by tooth.
May 14, 2009 5:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
I just don't think that's realistic, either about the domestic consequences, or international.
The domestic utility of releasing the photos has decreased enormously, becasue this isn't Bush/Cheney ongoing. Obama has already shut this stuff down, is closing Guantanamo, etc. Prosecutions may or not happen depending on the legal and political viability of such cases (which I would like but tend to doubt could actually work) so there's little value of sensational photos.
The international utility has become negative because we've already "come clean" to the extent we've admitted Bush/Cheney tortured, have condemned it, and shut it down. At this point graphic imagery is just going to alarm people, especially those who aren't particularly well informed and may not even realize these are old photos.
There definitely is a cost to our military and diplomacy objectives. That's actually one of the reasons we not supposed to torture, for our own military's sake and to avoid damaging our image, which ultimately lowers our effectiveness.
May 14, 2009 2:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hi, I work for a radio discussion show called World Have Your Say (www.worldhaveyoursay.com) and we are talking about Obama's decision to stop publication of the photos on our show today. Post a comment on our blog or email me at claudia.bradshaw@bbc.co.uk if you want to join in.
May 14, 2009 7:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think Maddow and Turley were hinting at the game-plan towards the end of their interview last night: Obama is giving himself political cover--forcing the ACLU to force him to release the photos.
Pragmatism at its most questionable.
May 14, 2009 12:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's what Turley said at the end of Maddow's interview last night:
MSNBC The Rachel Maddow Show - May 13, 2009: Turley says the 2nd Circuit court previously rejected all the arguments used today in his announcement that the administration would argue that the photos should not be released.
Turley: "The problem with having a lot more pictures is that it complete disassembles our previous arguments about Abu Ghraib. We protrayed a small group of peoples as hicks with sticks. And we knew they weren't... What these other photographs indicate... the idea that they were rogue operators is obviously wrong, if there are hundreds of other photos where they weren't involved."
"I think that the ACLU will ultimately prevail, and maybe that's what the Obama administration wants politically, is to be forced to release these photos as a political measure, but by doing this, by putting in this fight, by reversing it's earlier statement to the court, it makes a mockery of the system, it makes a mockery of this country."
After he finished, Rachel Maddow added that she thought Turley was "spot on".
View the entire interview here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x312110
May 14, 2009 1:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
The "mockery" comment is simply Turley keeping the pressure on. He is correct that the ACLU will prevail; and probably correct that Obama is requiring a court order in order to stay above the fray.
May 14, 2009 2:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
At the end of the day, a court may decide whether to release photos or not. Sometimes we just have to let the process unfold.
May 14, 2009 2:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
He is keeping the pressure on by making a true statement. The President is, indeed, making a mockery of our country if he's simply doing this to be "forced" to release the photos.
May 14, 2009 2:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not following your reasoning. How does it "makes a mockery of our country?" Could you take me through the steps in your reasoning that led you to that conclusion? I'm not trying to be confrontational, I'm honestly curious.
May 14, 2009 4:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
The mockery comment is Prof. Turley's not mine, form a comment above.
May 14, 2009 5:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Should have said in reply to a comment from jnagarya a couple of posts above. Sorry.
May 14, 2009 5:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
We are under an obligation to investigate and prosecute torture under international agreement. We're avoiding our obligation.
The President could have done much to get past the stink of this torture by investigating and revealing it from day 1 of his administration. This do-nothing and stone walling is as bad as the pictures themselves.
And quite frankly, maybe these goddamn pictures will get us to stop patting ourselves on the back about how moral and righteous we are, and instead try to earn the overrated superior image we have of ourselves.
Release the pictures and let's see how ugly we've become. Maybe those crazed murderous Muslims have a right to be crazed and murderous if this ugly side of us is the enemy they're fighting. We've always been good at ignoring the ugly American. Now let's look close in the mirror. Dorian Gray?
May 14, 2009 4:28 PM | Reply | Permalink