The public doesn't need to see these photos

[MrFun]

Fine, if you don't want to explain your disagreement I guess that's the end of our relationship.

[Drake Tungsten]

Why do I need to explain it? Your personal definition of whitewash is quite different from the commonly accepted one. It should be pretty obvious that's where our disagreement lies...

[MrFun]

I found this definition on dictionary.com:

white·wash ( P ) Pronunciation Key (hwtwsh, -wôsh, wt-)
n.
A mixture of lime and water, often with whiting, size, or
glue added, that is used to whiten walls, fences, or other structures.

Concealment or palliation of flaws or failures.

A defeat in a game in which the loser scores no points.



Denial of opportunity to publicize photos of an outrage fits with the second definition. The reason -- you want to diminish the real extent of the outrage by allowing for only printed media. Depriving the media of photos clearly diminishes the real extent of the outrage.

And by diminishing the actual extent of the outrage are you not partaking in concealment or palliation of flaws or failures?

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
I'm glad to see you take such a responsible POV as regards the fight against Islamism.

Islamism is a product of US foreign policy.

[MrFun]

It's also the product of Soviet ambitions in the Middle East and Central Asia during the Cold War.




Both, United States and Soviet Union (now Russia) have reaped what they have sown.

[Drake Tungsten]

Denial of opportunity to publicize photos of an outrage fits with the second definition. The reason -- you want to diminish the real extent of the outrage by allowing for only printed media. Depriving the media of photos clearly diminishes the real extent of the outrage.

The extent of the potential outrage has nothing to do with anything. How can you conceal something that hasn't happened yet (and might not ever happen)? The issue that could be concealed is the actions of American interrogators. If said actions are reported in the print media then they are not being concealed and therefore no whitewash can be said to be taking place.

[Drake Tungsten]

Islamism is a product of US foreign policy.

So is Chinese independence from Japan...

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten



The extent of the potential outrage has nothing to do with anything. How can you conceal something that hasn't happened yet (and might not ever happen)? The issue that could be concealed is the actions of American interrogators. If said actions are reported in the print media then they are not being concealed and therefore no whitewash can be said to be taking place.

from the article in the OP:

"A federal judge has told the government it will have to release additional pictures of detainee abuse at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison, civil rights lawyers said."

What do you mean that the abuse of detainees has not happened yet?

[Drake Tungsten]

This isn't worth my time...

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger

Islamism is a product of US foreign policy.

While it would be hard to argue that one of the many inputs has been U.S. foreign policy, your statement is more ridiculous than saying U.S, foreign policy had nothing to do with it.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat

I understand your point, but I think the issue here is not gratuitous exploitation of pics of someone like Louima, but rather, how severe are the violations and how widespread? I think (from polls I've seen) that there's a good portion of the population that doesn't give a damn what we do in Gitmo or Abu Ghraib - I fall partly in the middle, in that I have a realistic understanding of prisoner treatment, especially of recent captures or irregular fighters. My concern isn't particularly with the poor insurgents who got captured before they got close to Allah, but with the efficiency of our operations and the level of discipline, command and control, and the degree of value we get out of our MI processing of insurgent prisoners.

I agree completely.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by GePap

I am glad you are so willing to "win hearts and minds" by making sure the Muslim world knows that while we torture them (something they can read all about), we feel them too backwards and ignorant and violent to be allowed to see the fruits of our labor

I don't think that they are sophisticated enough to grasp our disdain.

[Vanguard]

What public interest is being served by continuing to show the Abu Gharib photos?

Well, how about the truth?

If you want to pretend that Abu Gharib never happened, then you have a easy option. Turn to Faux News and leave it there.

We grown ups, however, don't have time for this sort of lie.

[mindseye]

DanS, could you maybe just pick up a bucket of sand at Walmart or something?

The rest of the nation needs to stare at those photos a good, long time, and reflect on just what America has become, and how it got that way.

Maybe they could start by asking the new attorney general.

[DanS]

DanS, could you maybe just pick up a bucket of sand at Walmart or something?

I'm disappointed in you, mindseye. I expected a response a little more thoughtful from you.