The ACLU did win and these pictures are the result.
What gave you the idea an australian court can order the US Govt to release pictures?
Any anger that results is due solely to those that caused the situation in the first place. The messenger is never to blame for anything.
Bricker is no more than an inch away from that, with his “This *alone * isn’t enough proof to convict!” nonsense.
(quotes are used there for paraphrasing, btw, as they are in normal English usage outside this board, m’kay?)
So why talk about it? So we don’t forget about it. So when it comes up again it doesn’t get met with “That’s old stuff, move on, willya?” when it isn’t old stuff. So the reflexive partisans, the self-appointed defenders of the indefensible don’t get any stronger a feeling than necessary that they’re on solid ground. So the casual readers of this forum, if not all participants, don’t think we’ve all begun to think this administration’s behavior toward “detainees” has become acceptable in any way or to any degree.
If it makes you uncomfortable to face it and explore it, that’s your problem entirely. You can leave those of us citizens with a strong sense of ownership of, and responsibility for, our government in a democracy alone if you prefer.
I don’t really see a parade of GD regulars, tagos. I see about seven posters in this thread. Three of them – me, Abbie Normal, and John Mace - who understood the words of the English language as they appeared in my post. One more, RT Firefly, understands them as well, but questions my use of context. I don’t believe that RT is ascribing to me any more sinister motive than that.
Then there’s the rest. Who is left for the parade of “GD regulars” tired of “the same old tactic?”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11362767/
Thats where I got the impression that these where not released to the ACLU.
That would be correct. I find it somewhat irritating to have to switch gears from thinking, “this is a normal person using words in normal ways,” to “this is a lawyer, using words in legal fashion in an inappropriate context.”
We mathematicians use a bunch of ordinary words as mathematical terms of art, where (for instance) “almost every” allows for an uncountable number of exceptions, and “uncountable” itself means ‘not just infinite, but too big an infinity to be put into one-to-one correspondence with the integers.’
Unlike with the legal profession, though, our plans for world domination haven’t gotten nearly as far as the English language. So when speaking with mostly nonmathematicians, we don’t presume that people are, or should be, using ordinary terms in their mathematical sense.
Really, John?
Do you actually, really believe that “The only people denying there was torture at A-G are not posters in this forum.”?
Unless your memory has gotten very short, you will, I’m sure, recall people who agreed with OxycontinBo that it was “just hazing”. Right here in this very forum. Do you truly not remember that?
-Joe
I don’t recall it, but perhaps it was in a thread I missed.
I certainly never SAID it.
No, I don’t remember anyone saying that. Can we have a cite so we can see the context? It’s hard to fathom that after the convictions of the people involved that anyone would continue that line of argument.
I still don’t see what the debate is. This would make a good Pit thread, since no one is going to come in here and argue against the OP. I never said we should forget, just that there isn’t a debate. And you haven’t defined one either.
Never said it made me uncomfortable, I’m just pointing out that if you post a thread WITH NO DEBATABLE POINTS, don’t be surprised when someone tries to make one. The best place to “explore this” is in the Pit. That’s what that forum is for-- “exploring” acts of revulsion such as are depicted in these photos.
But now, of course, thanks to Bricker we don’t actually know whether or not there were actually any acts of revulsion! I feel so much better. Don’t you?
As for the rest, I’m looking into it. I’m sure I’ll find something soon.
-Joe
My 2 cents:
The OP indicates there are 15 additional pictures not viewed previously that support the contention there were activities that crossed the line into torture. This implies that the question is “With the previous evidence and this new evidence, can we all agree there was torture?”
Bricker responded that the new pictures alone do not prove it. I believe this is an accurate statement, but not really an answer to the question in the OP.
However, Bricker did indicate that he agrees with the general statement.
While I don’t see any problem with his post, I do understand the frustration some posters may have if you focused only on the portion of his post where he says “not based solely on these photos”. A rigorous proof could not be constructed from the photos alone, but our brains don’t work that way. We are giant pattern matchers drawing on a vast amount of experience throughout our lives and we can look at a set of seemingly incomplete data and draw an accurate conclusion a high percentage of the time (a very high percentage of the time depending on the nature of the data, like facial recognition, etc.).
My 2 cents:
The OP indicates there are 15 additional pictures not viewed previously that support the contention there were activities that crossed the line into torture. This implies that the question is “With the previous evidence and this new evidence, can we all agree there was torture?”
Bricker responded that the new pictures alone do not prove it. I believe this is an accurate statement, but not really an answer to the question in the OP.
However, Bricker did indicate that he agrees with the general statement.
While I don’t see any problem with his post, I do understand the frustration some posters may have if you focused only on the portion of his post where he says “not based solely on these photos”. A rigorous proof could not be constructed from the photos alone, but our brains don’t work that way. We are giant pattern matchers drawing on a vast amount of experience throughout our lives and we can look at a set of seemingly incomplete data and draw an accurate conclusion a high percentage of the time (a very high percentage of the time depending on the nature of the data, like facial recognition, etc.).
The suggestion that the injuries happened pre-capture or during capture is possible… but in light of the coverup at Camp Mercury and at Abu Graibh… well, in light of what we know that suggestion has to be taken with a grain fo salt.
[
](http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1108972,00.html)
[
Okay, John, here we go.
From this thread: Revisiting the Moral Highground: Torturing Terrorism Suspects in Afghanistan
Post #6 from RobertTB:
Continuing down to post #24 we find DrDeth stating that what was going on was absolutely not torture:
But, of course, he then goes on to clarify in post #27 that…
…even something as small as stress positions (them pussy prisoners!) is, apparently, equivalent to 80’s “hair rock” and “gangsta rap”. Of course, the thought of The Good Guys doing anything torturous is, much like lil’ Bricker in this thread, completely unprovable unless it’s been notarized by a Priest, a Rabbi, and an Imam.
Actually, though, DrDeth can remind us of a simpler, gentler time when we didn’t know better. When the evidence hadn’t been waved in our face in the form of many, many photographs of people being mistreated.
But, some people seem to think that some guy will find a piece of jagged glass in his cell and tattoo “RAPEIST” onto his own ass. I mean, I’ve had that urge (except mine was “DISCO STUD”), so maybe it’s just the natural thing to do?
There’s only 126 more posts in that thread if you really feel like doing some more reading.
But now, let’s move on to some excitment after we’d lost our innocence regarding the “our troops wouldn’t do that!” idea.
Because, once we knew all about broken glowsticks and assholes dearly departed (and certainly unlameted) Brutus found his way into this thread and said
Further regarding torture, in post #24 he says
Basically, torture away! It’s what’s for dinner! Besides, everyone else is doing it!
Of course, for a little bit of humor (because I’ll admit that we haven’t seen any pictures from Gitmo - and I won’t even suffix with “yet”) we have someone who tries to make it sound like a good fun summer camp, just without the s’mores!.
So, John, I’ll admit I could probably have more and better. But, I’ve met your challenge. If the SDMB would let me search for three-letter words (abu) or there was a consistant spelling for Gharib, Garib, Gahrib, and the like, I’m sure I could do better.
Besides, they do expect me to actually, you know, DO stuff here at the office.
-Joe
It wasn’t a challenge, it was a question.
And you absolutely did not answer the question, which was about A-G*, not Afghanistan. Besides, AFAICT, those quotes are so much denying torture as saying that torture is OK in some circumstances. They may doubt whether stress positions or loud music is torture, but we’re not talking about stress positions or loud music at A-G.
*Just to be clear, A-G is short for Abu Ghraib, not Afghanstan. I hope that wasn’t a point of confusion, considering the title of this thread.
Whatever, John. You and Bricker go well together.
The very first quote involves a guy saying that what the people were put through “is no worse then what our pilots go through in E&E courses”.
The loud music, if you’d actually read things, refers to some pinhead saying ‘various potential tortures aren’t tortures - they’re inconveniences…like when I’m forced to hear gangsta rap’.
What can I say? I started with the earliest torture threads. I provided plenty. If you don’t think AfGhanistan and Abu Ghraib are comparable, that’s your problem, not mine.
There appears to have been less discussion of AG than Afghanistan. I guess everyone had gotten used to American troops performing torture by that point.
-Joe
Your problem is that when someone says “I don’t remember” you are interpretting it as “I don’t believe you”. I was simply saying that I didn’t remember anyone on this board saying that there was no torture at Abu Ghraib. I don’t claim to have perfect memory, and I don’t claim to have read every post in every thread. I further went on to clarify that I couldn’t see how anyone could continue that line of argument after so many convictions had been handed down by the military to the guards at A-G. And, as far as this thread goes, not one person has come into it saying that there was no torture at A-G. I seriously doubt that any will. (I’d place a wager, but that would just encourage some yahoo to make me lose.)
So, what point are you trying to make, exactly?
Having now seen the full set of photo’s and videos(you can find links on BoingBoing) I will say that the released material on their own does show torture and ill treatment. The pics RT linked to are not all of them. There are pics of a dead body with half his head gone. There is a picture of a room covered in blood (there is a section of the room show in the set linked in the OP) after a general was ‘questioned’ in there. The general is now dead surprisingly.
How’s all this going down in the States? It’s headline news on all stations radio and TV all over again in Ireland and the UK from what I can see.
These new pictures are nothing new. Those who have been doing our reading know that this sort of thing has been going on. Seeing it living color simply drives it home.
These military policemen have gone a very long way towards loosing this war. Because of their actions, hundreds of Americans and many thousands of Iraqis will die who need not to have died.
The Army I love is in a state of indiscipline. The soldiers who did these things should be tried and hung by their necks until they are dead. Their officers, after witnessing these executions should then be treated the same.
It will take a generation to rebuild the Army. The first step is to admit it needs to be rebuilt.
It will be tough. These soldiers are drawn from American society. Few modern Americans have the ethical base required to be a good soldier. We must find this elite and use them to rebuild.
All of this is very sad.
Most of this is quite wrong. This is not the nadir of US society. It is the apogee, at dinner all through the habitat of ruling America, glasses are raised to ‘our brave boys in Abu-Grahib’ while corporate donors discuss the funding to preserve their names and deeds in everlasting bronze.
Make no mistake about it, these events are the very reason why the US is in Iraq and why your president holds office.
What publishing of these images achieves is reminding us that a few wrist slaps on bottom-feeder thugs is not a full accounting. That remains to be done. If the USA doesn’t want this to keep blowing up in their faces then a proper accounting is needed.
Most of the world does not believe the few bad apples theory.