So, there are trials underway? Or just prosecutions? I’m asking because I’m surprised I never heard about that ( the trials. I had heard about the evidences). If so, who’s tried/prosecuted, exactly?
I believe the military has already sentenced some folks for what was done at AG. Sorry, I’m at work atm and don’t have the time to look it up (and of course I could be totally wrong…always a possibility with me as I kind of catch the news as I can).
-XT
It’s unclear if this represents new info, or is the same info that has already been used. But the investigations are still ongoing. U.S. military dog handlers face Abu Ghraib hearing.
Nope, not unreasonable, but even your cite states that they are asking the courts to block it from being released to the public. I’m perfectly happy to wait until we have confirmation of that from more sources, but once it’s validated, I think the point of the OP stands, and that they are indeed trying to “squelch” the release, even if they’re not yet going against a court order to do so.
I want my government to freely release this type of thing, and take responsibility for our mistakes, as well as our good deeds. I can’t imagine any sort of “it’s a matter of national security” reason that would apply to the release, especially if names and faces were blacked or blurred out.
While there could very well be some things going on behind the scenes that we don’t know about, I believe the dog handlers are still remnants from the first wave of photos, etc. out of Abu Ghraib. I’m not aware of a single person arrested for the rape and other crimes that are allegedly in the videos in question. I’m don’t feel that letting them run free, especially if it’s just to help cover up the issue, is a good thing.
I guess I’ll just wait until we know more, but I don’t have to like that fact that the government doesn’t want me to know, do I?
Why should anyone be surprised? It’s called “damage control”… for The Faithful®.
As if they needed it anyway.
PS-BushCo’s war slogan:
“Slightly better than Saddam.”
No need for a puke smiley.
Personally, I don’t want to have to see them either. Just reading a few short reports made me feel disgust. On the one hand, I’m thinking that if it was made public in all its sickness it would be impossible to sweep away or “conveniently forget”. But on the other hand, I’m also thinking that if they were splashed all over prime time the people who should be charged for doing these things (and the people who gave orders/permission or looked the other way) would use it to get all charges thrown out - prejudicial or something. That has to be avoided at all costs. All I know for sure is that it is sick and twisted and those involved, from the top down should be put away forever, no matter how high up they are.
But the OP is claiming that said squelching has already been accomplished.
I don’t like it particularly, but I guess I’m a bit jaded. I don’t expect our government officials to be boy scouts, and that’s why we have a series of checks and balances. You don’t get into high office by rolling over everytime somone asks you to incriminate yourself. The process is working, and no one is surpressing the story itself. If the pentagon sets itself up in contempt of court, that will be a story, too, in addition to the photos and films.
Its not the evidence should be released, but that it must, and it must be us doing it. So long as it remains hidden, it festers. Daylight is the most potent antiseptic for this sort of rotteness.
I’m assuming, given previously noted reactions, that this is worse than Abu Ghraib. But how much worse? So long as that limit isn’t defined, its fuel for our enemies. The truth is likely to be shameful and humiliating, but so long as that truth remains veiled, it is open to exaggeration.
Suppose our enemies start spreading the story that the photos show the production of a homoerotic snuff film featuring Muslim boys? Or a story to the effect that the US soldiers featured are clearly Jewish? What’s to stop them? Suppose someone Photoshops some “proof”? What do we say then? “No, the real pictures are nothing like that, but you can’t see them. Trust us, we’re the Americans, we don’t do stuff like that”…
Its not about the people who hate us, its about the people who don’t hate us yet.
Should the Allies have destroyed the film they took of concentration camp victims and survivors instead of making it available to the general public? Was their privacy violated? Yes, but made people aware of the extent of Nazi war crimes. Those films provoke a visceral, emotion response 6 decades later. If a few American soldiers are commiting war crimes (most of the stuff supposedly on the tapes would qualify) then the 280+ million people they’re disgracing have a right to know and see as many of the details as possible. Blur the faces of the victims out. Even if the contents of the videos enrages the Arab world and causes more deaths the fault lies not with those who forced the videos to be releases but with the perpetrators who commits the acts depicted in them.
I think alphaboi has the most potent argument here as to why these should be released. And to all who say the American public is to squimish, this material too vulgar, etc, are you aware that modern day high schoolers see videos of the WWII death camp atrocities in school? Either this stuff is tamer and shouldn’t raise concerns being shown publicly, or its worse and then we really need to prepare for some serious sh*t to hit the fan both at home and abroad.
Let it be dragged out into the lght of day and let the perps and those who made it possible hang for it. I just hope convictions aren’t limited only to the low ranking jerks. I hope it destroys those high up who authorized it too.
[hijack]
If there is documentary evidence of US soldiers forcibly sodomizing Muslim boys, and I personally hope to hell and back that there isn’t because it never happened, which right-wing pundit or politician will be the first to blame it on the policy of allowing gays to serve in the military?
This whole subject in all its ramifications is just so, so sickening.
[hijack]
Just a small quibble. Gayness has nothing to do with it, anymore than straightness has to with with “standard” rape. The only requirement is a vicious nature and the willingness to do it. It shouldn’t be any surprise to you that gays can be just as angry, just as “out for blood” over this as anyone else. It has plenty to do with an administration who said the Geneva Conventions, and all other codes of conduct, all decency, don’t apply. Guess who that was.
Yup, I know that homosexuality doesn’t correlate with same-sex sexual abuse of prisoners, any more than it does with same-sex child molestation or other pathological behaviors. But it’s probably a good idea to make that point explicitly; thanks for doing so.
I was just wondering, in a cynical gallows-humor type way, which public figure would be the first to try to shift the blame for such abuses onto gays, the way that Sen. Santorum tried to blame the Boston diocese’s child-molesting priests on New England gay-friendly liberalism.
I guess I must have figured somehow that this whole situation wasn’t depressing enough already. I have no idea why I thought that. Sorry.
The reason we need these tapes to be released is so that we, the American electorate, can have one common set of facts upon which to base our decisions. Possibly wouldn’t have to be the tapes, but it has to be a medium which cannot be trivialized, as an overly dry description might be.
IIRC, the footage was only filmed by Americans and was of Iraqis raping the boys.
To me, it’s irrelevant. It happened in prisons being run by the U.S. didn’t it? Right under the noses of Americans who should have stopped it immediately. To participate, or film it, or simply allow it to happen shows consent and encouragement. Guilty.
Guilty? No need for a trial to determine that?
You have al of the info you need right now to come to that conclusion?