There are fifteen of them here that haven’t been previously seen, courtesy of the Sydney Morning Herald. Some of them are pretty bad, and a number of them are not safe for work. This link goes to one that IS safe, but if you click on “view all thumbnails”, you’ll get to all the rest.
Dear Rush: still up for a fraternity initiation, Abu Ghraib-style? Or can we finally put that one to rest? Can we all agree that some of what went on at Abu Ghraib unquestionably crossed the line into torture?
No decent human being would disagree. The problem is those savages that think it’s okay anyway, because of TWAT. And those that redefine ‘torture’ to suit their own evil purposes. EG Bush and co.
As a general statement? Yes.
Based solely on the photos you just linked to?
No.
Did the guy in #8 just have a bad rash on his butt?
The guys in #7, #13, and #14 - ran into a door, perhaps?
Maybe they just fell down the stairs. Yeah, that’s the ticket.
Never underestimate a partisan’s capacity for self-deception.
Bricker. How do you suppose the (presumably Arab) guy on the far left corner in pic #11 wrote I AM A RAPEIST(sp) in perfect block letters in English on his own butt while lying down in a room of cowering naked men?
I suppose that presumably naked and (if body language is to be accurately infered, terrified) man backed against the wall in pic #10 is merely trying to pet the nice German Shepherds two of those four guards are holding back on chain leashes as they lunge at him? And am I nuts or is the guard on the far left giving what looks like at first glance a Nazi salute?
I agree with you that these still pictures, in an of themselves, do not unquestionably show torture at Abu Ghrahib. If one were ignorant of all the other facts that have come out about this place, one might be persuaded that the injuries on the prisoners was purely prisoner inflicted, or that they were quelling a riot, or strip searching the prisoners, and that the smiling guards were consummate professionals. But c’mon, man.
There’s video as well.
Always good to have a mentally disturbed person to practise :mad: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4715540.stm
We don’t need to. We just have to wait for The Usual Suspects to chime in.
Ihave no idea if their injuries came about before they were taken into custody. Do you, BASED ON THOSE PHOTOS?
If only I had said something like, “Based solely on the photos you just linked to…” in response to the OP. If only I had acknowlged that yes, torture did happen.
Oh, wait. :smack:
Well, of course not. I had no idea you were being that lawyerly nitpicky, and I was supposed to throw out everything I ever once knew about Abu Ghraib.
This ain’t a freakin’ court, Bricker. I can’t guarantee the chain of custody of those photos, either.
Which word in “Based solely on the photos you just linked to” requires legal training to decipher?
Stop responding. This is just the usual Bricker attempt to derail threads injurious to The Leader, into a legal nit-picking siding.
He’s fooling no-one so just ignore it. The only way to win that game is not to play.
I disagree, Bricker is stating an obvious problem with still pictures of injuries sustained by the detainee’s. Iraq is a war zone right now, I am sure all those detained where not in pristine condition prior to detention.
He was simply stating that. From what I can see, he was not disputing that obvious abuses had occured, but he is not judging them from the photo’s.
True, they probably got a Rodney King type reception when they were arrested.
Like these poor fuckers who British soldiers taped themselves dealing with.
Askia has already answered your and Bricker’s transparent nit-picks. Who do you think you’re fooling? The world knows what went on there and no pseudo-legalese wriggling is going to make a blind bit of difference.
But if you want to believe shrapnel tatooed english phrases on prisoners and draped them in hood with wires attached to extremities you go right ahead and knock yourself out.
You’ll pardon the rest of us if we just sit here and snigger.
Nothing in that film rules out the possibility that the alleged Iraqi’s were in fact aliens exercising mind control over the innocent British squaddies to engage in what is on the planet Zarg, a sexual act.
You speak for everyone with the rest of us eh. Good to know that. Now can you answer for all of you with an apology for your comment? Seeing as I said
No one I have seen in this thread is denying abuse, you seem to be implying I am.
But I will not base all my thinking based on pictures.
Legalese? Please I cannot even begin to think in legal terms, I use common sense. And that sense tells me, pictures do not always tell the whole truth. If they did, I guess we might as well list Big Foot, The Lochness Monster in the newest editions of wildlife books eh.
Apology? Dream on. And you might want to take your ‘common sense’ in for a check-up. Even to compare AG pictures to Bigfoot is a joke. Ponder the word ‘context’ and in relation to Bricker’s tactics, ‘prior form’.
Argument By Attrition.
Shit, I really should have trademarked that or something.
-Joe™
Again that’s true.
Let me ask you this though. Do these pictures and videos indicate to you that abuses took place when placed along side the previous ones and the fact that Rummie himself has said that there are a lot more and they are a lot worse
Bullshit arguments that try to nitpick around the issue just come across as what they are. Bullshit.