• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Obama Flip-Flops on 'Torture' Pics

Texan

Well-known member
Even though it's another flip-flop and lie, I agree with his decision in this case. But I question his motives and certainly the timing. He should have never promised to release them in the first place. But...he's finally doing the right thing and I give him credit for that.

==========================================

Obama attempts to block release of 'torture' photos

President Barack Obama is attempting to block the release of up to 2,000 photographs of alleged abuse at American prisons in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Last Updated: 7:14PM BST 13 May 2009


Just weeks after announcing he would make the images public, administration officials said the president had told his legal advisers that releasing the photos would endanger troops.

The change of heart is thought to have come after senior military officials gave warning the release could cause a backlash against troops.

Mr Obama now wants the issue to go back to court, although federal appeals judges have already ruled the photos should be released.

The proposed release of the photographs had threatened to reignite the scandal surrounding Abu Ghraib prison in 2004.

It came after a legal action by the American Civil Liberties Union and followed a political firestorm over alleged torture of detainees under President George W. Bush.

Some of the photographs, which had been due to be released before May 28, were said to show American service personnel humiliating prisoners.

The images relate to more than 400 separate cases involving alleged prisoner abuse between 2001 and 2005.

Descriptions of some of the alleged abuse photographs include:

* A prisoner pushed up against a wall as military guards or interrogators appear to threaten to sexually assault him with a broomstick

* Female soldiers posing with hooded, shackled prisoners who were stripped naked

* Hooded prisoners on transport planes with Playboy magazines opened to pictures of nude women on their laps

The administration initially planned to release only the 21 photos sought by the ACLU, but General David Petraeus ordered that all 2,000 photographs be released to keep from "dragging this issue out forever".

But the Pentagon said there could be a backlash in the Middle East similar to the one provoked by pictures from Abu Ghraib prison, near Baghdad, in 2004 which became emblematic of American mistakes in Iraq.

The Bush administration had resisted releasing the images to the public, contending the disclosure would fuel anti-American feeling and violate US obligations towards prisoners under the Geneva Conventions.



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/
 

leanin' H

Well-known member
What bothers me about this is the fact that NOW he sees this is a huge mistake! :shock: Doesnt say much about his judgement when he is privy to reports and intelligence and the like and I'm not! But I thought this was a horrible idea from the start! And He only now gets what a disaster this will be! AFTER the courts are releasing it? Obama is either Very Naive or not as bright as the hype-machines want us to believe? Either way, it is simply one more giant red flag, warning light, siren in a long line of question marks that marks ONLY his 1st hundred days! :roll: Atleast he realized how bad this will be! I will give him credit for that! :D :wink: Not much credit, but a bit! :wink:
 

backhoeboogie

Well-known member
Why did he sensationalize this to start with? Is he completely nuts? This guy is running our country? Would you hire him to run a snow cone stand?
 

Mike

Well-known member
I respect a person who is able to change a decision based on additional information.

Additional information? What additional information could have been gained?

He knew the ramifications of releasing these pictures from the git-go.

Nothing changed. :roll:

Personally, I like a person who can look at a situation and be honest about a decision the first go-round... without looking like he waffled.
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
reader (the Second) said:
I respect a person who is able to change a decision based on additional information.

Additional information? Any idiot could know the potential harm from the day one! My 11 year old would know how it would make the U.S. look to the world!

And do not be so sure the pictures will not get out! Come election time I am sure they will resurface, and his mind will be changed!
 

TexasBred

Well-known member
hypocritexposer said:
Nice to see that Cheney has brought attention to this issue, and that Obama is listening to reason.

Just heard on the radio that Cheney's request that the release the memos showing the results of the interrogations was denied.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Cheney called their bluff, and he won. In politics, if someone is wrong, you prove it. If they are right, you refuse to provide any proof.

No wonder they want him to shut-up.

Now Pelosi is running around like she's guilty of something calling the CIA liars, that should help her a bunch.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
An interesting sidebar on this story is that a Fed. judge has ordered the pics to be released, the time to appeal is over, and the papers have even been signed by the government setting the release date as May 28. For Obama to balk now is going against a court order, and he can't legally do that.

As a Constitutional Professor, he should know that. If he doesn't, it shows what kind of a Consitutional Professor he is. If he does, it shows how much respect he has for the law.

Ain't this guy just a dandy?
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Sandhusker, could it be that he knew that all along?

He's playing politics, plain and simple.

His caring for what the public thinks, goes as far as them thinking that he made an attempt to "restrict the photos, for National Security reasons"
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
hypocritexposer said:
Sandhusker, could it be that he knew that all along?

He's playing politics, plain and simple.

His caring for what the public thinks, goes as far as them thinking that he made an attempt to "restrict the photos, for National Security reasons"

He's always playing politics, that's for sure. He's the typical greasy Chicago politician doing whatever he can for himself. Do I think he has a master plan with this? No. He's smart enough to fool the gullible, but I think this is just his lack of experience and common sense showing.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Smart enough to fool the gullible, YES.

He thinks playing politics makes someone smart, he's been told that by his voters.

Strategic thinker, NO. He can't think 2 steps ahead, let alone 6.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
This is exactly the same as was testified in Congress by Secretary Rices aide- and military officers...That the use of torture, the Abu Ghraib torture incident, and Guantanamo recruited many Al Quaeda terrorists-- and as the one military statement said brought into Iraq 90% of these foreign "freedom fighters" and probably killed more US troops than it saved.....

Abuse photos put U.S. in 'double catch-22'

Thu May 14, 2009

By Cal Perry
CNN


BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- The one-star general almost yells when asked to talk about the infamous Abu Ghraib photos showing U.S. soldiers abusing Iraqi detainees.

"If we had had a company commander doing what he was supposed to be doing, a battalion commander doing what he was supposed to be doing ..." Brig. Gen. David Quantock said.

He carried on -- growing more and more angry. So the next obvious question was, "It makes you angry?"

"It does make me angry," he said. "Because I think we lost a lot of American lives because of those photos."


And there it is -- the issue of detainee abuse and what the U.S. military struggles with, and has struggled with, since the release of those photos in 2004, some of which showed naked prisoners being humiliated, stacked in piles or subjected to mock torture.

Quantock, the head of detainee operations in Iraq, is echoing a debate raging in Washington.

Another round of photos allegedly showing further abuse of prisoners was to be released by the end of this month. But President Obama asked that the photos be held back.

Obama said he believed the release of the pictures could put American lives in danger. That is catch-22 situation No. 1: on one hand transparency; on the other, the safety of U.S. troops.

Quantock agreed with his commander-in-chief. "The jihadists have used those pictures. And it has spurred some of the violence," he said.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
"Obama said he believed the release of the pictures could put American lives in danger."

Well, he's a little bit late in that revelation...... :roll:

The release of our interrogation techniques put American lives in danger, too.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
What do you think changed Obama's mind in releasing the photos, OT?

There were quite a few on PB, that had said the very same thing as Brig. Gen. David Quantock, when the topic first came up a few weeks ago.

At that time, Obama was not aware the pictures might endanger troops.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
hypocritexposer said:
What do you think changed Obama's mind in releasing the photos, OT?

I just watched Attorney General Holder testify to the House Justice committee on C-SPAN, that it was mainly because the commanders on the ground in both Afghanistan and Iraq had echoed the same concerns as Brig. Gen. Quantock ... The fear that they would be used as a recruiting tool for terrorists and endanger US troops lives, the same as those torture pictures from Abu Ghraib were...
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
hypocritexposer said:
Why did he refuse to listen to them when they said the same thing about the memos?

The contents of the memos have for the most part been public knowledge for sometime- with most of it already having been testified about in Congressional hearings- including some memos that I don't believe have yet been released- including the one where Cheney/Rumsfeld showed they knew what they were authorizing was illegal because they signed off on preemptive immunity (something they can't do as no one under US law can give someone permission to break the law before the fact)...

The pictures on the other hand haven't been released- and the military is much more feared that they will end up being posted all over every militant terrorist website- and al jazeera tv worldwide as recruitment posters...
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Make whatever excuses you want for the man OT. He is now listening to his advisors, he didn't on the memos.

Deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan are up since he went and decided to play his political game.

Iraq's government says that 355 Iraqis were killed in April, making it the bloodiest month so far this year.

The bulk of the deaths came from a number of big explosions, and the death count did not include at least 80 Iranian pilgrims killed in Iraq.

April was also the deadliest month for US troops since September, with 18 soldiers killed.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
hypocritexposer said:
Why did he refuse to listen to them when they said the same thing about the memos?

The contents of the memos have for the most part been public knowledge for sometime- with most of it already having been testified about in Congressional hearings- including some memos that I don't believe have yet been released- including the one where Cheney/Rumsfeld showed they knew what they were authorizing was illegal because they signed off on preemptive immunity (something they can't do as no one under US law can give someone permission to break the law before the fact)...

The pictures on the other hand haven't been released- and the military is much more feared that they will end up being posted all over every militant terrorist website- and al jazeera tv worldwide as recruitment posters...

The content of the memos clearly were NOT public knowledge already or there would be no furor over them being released.
 
Top