But as far as I’ve seen that’s not being done. Correction – I KNOW thats not being done. And if we can’t hope for accountability, we at least need transparency. Or at least a smattering of honesty. Not only did he not release the photos, he said “They aren’t that bad.” When you say something like that, and refuse to show the pictures? Then your shooting your own credibility to hell. If he had said “They are horrible. They make me sick – they are worse than we have seen before, and the people who are doing them are going to pay the consequences of their action, but we feel its in the best interests of our people to not reveal the actual photos” you know, I would have been okay with it. But the ways he’s handling it… just, no.

Oh have no fear I have not by any means unplugged from the process. Far from it. I am a supporter of freedom of expression and I think that the requirements of freedom of information with our government require that the administration release the photos of a crimes committed by our own military. You do not hide photos of crimes. You do not seek to excuse such secrecy by pretending that the information will ‘inflame’ various people.

Once someone performs way he or she loses me forever. Forever. There’s no going back. There’s no more vote for this person. I become an opponent. I will campaign and fund and vote until Obama is no longer in office. He’s a four year president because when you lose people like me you are all done.

If the moderators allow it (and I fully understand if they don’t), here is a link to my withdrawal of support for Obama from my own site:

http://www.candlelightstories.com/2009/05/14/candlelight-stories-withdraws-support-of-president-obama/

I take this situation very very seriously because it goes right to the heart of the need for freedom of information in our government. A Democratic administration that does not release these photos is not a liberal administration by any stretch of the definition.

We are supposed to be a nation of laws. When we sweep the crimes of high-office holders aside for expedient reasons, we do more harm to ourselves than any terrorist can. This policy by the Obama administration is immoral and cowardly. By covering this up, by lamely attempting to “hide” what everyone knows happened only ensures it will happen again. We should live up to our own standards, no matter what radical Islam thinks.

Well I guess that’s just me posturing “pure.”

When we torture, when we subscribe to the Nixon/Rice belief that if “the President does it, it’s not illegal” then all that is LEFT for the terrorist to destroy is buildings, because we’ve destroyed the real country ourselves.

What’s the big deal of a few possibly innocent Ay-rabs getting beaten and raped compared to a real public investment in solar panels? < \i>

In that case, the argument for releasing these photos is that it adds pressure to carry out those prosecutions. I don’t believe releasing the photos would lead to that. It would< \i> lead to real danger for American soldiers, and it would distract from the social changes Obama DID promise and IS carrying out.

Should people push the debate? Absolutely. But for goodness sake don’t claim, as many here have, that Obama hasn’t been an agent of real change.

Oh wait…

…in this instance there is no man to sell out to. Who exactly do you think Obama is covering for with evil intent? The Bush (!?) administration? Has it occurred to the people up in arms that maybe a lot of smart people sat down in a room, hashed it out, and in the end decided that releasing the photos might cause more harm then good?

Obama has nothing to lose when he trashes on the old administration. Love or hate the decision, you might want to stop and consider for a moment that maybe, just maybe, Obama isn’t sell out to , but instead is genuinely doing what he thinks is best for the American people.

I am pretty sure not releasing the photos has zero to do American sensibilities. I can saw with complete assurance that the decision to not release the photos despite having released the documents associated with them is 100% about people outside of the US. It is a calculated move to not dump a PR gift in the lap of Al-qaeda.

Images mean a lot. Hell, look at Pakistan. You have the Taliban doing horrible things in the Swat valley and the majority of Pakistan wanted nothing to do with it. Then, a video leaks out of a Taliban flogging a woman. The video didn’t change any facts or evidence. Everyone in Pakistan knew what was happening on an intellectual level, but it wasn’t until they saw what they already knew that rage finally spilled over.

Personally, I give Obama the benefit of the doubt. He doesn’t stand to gain anything politically from this. On the contrary, his reversal will likely hurt him politically and toss canon fodder to the right. I personally think it is a bold move. I personally LIKE having a president who can see that what he originally thought was wrong and have his mind changed. I don’t consider inflexibility and the inability to listen to the arguments of others as a virtue.

Maybe in another time line…..

-MG

Huh?

Not releasing the photos means he can continue to keep a lid on calls for investigations into the torture regime. It’s obviously, undoubtedly a political winner for him.

In a court those pictures would be (and should be) used as evidence, but when the American justice system seems to be turning a blind eye its the public that needs those pictures to be able to say ‘THIS is what happened. THIS is why those people need to be in jail.’ Extremists are the least of America’s problems when the people in charge are able to circumvent the law.

The entire world was cheering for Obama to get elected and now he is, himself, flaming that same anti-americanism via inaction.

I had alot of hope for the future…

It seems my hope was sorely misplaced…

You don’t get that done if you go around arresting ex-presidents. Simply, the office of president is bigger than Bush.

The subtext here is that the republican party is re-forming around libertarianism. Here’s a litmus test: if you’re on the same side as Hannity (who is also making a big deal about this), you need to re-think things.

As more of those American men and women come home in body bags more Americans disagree with war. At which point war is not “our national bidding”. Remember, the Democrats fiercely opposed anti-war candidates in their primary. The country was asked to choose between a number of corporate-funded pro-war candidates. Any candidates who opposed war as policy were marginalized in what little coverage they received and prevented from getting the coverage necessary for the country to realize that life doesn’t have to be this way.

Actually I voted for Obama but I was never under the illusion that much would “change”.

It’s still disappointing though.

Yeah, systematic, widespread torture is a fair price to pay for better health care, energy and education. What’s the big deal of a few possibly innocent Ay-rabs getting beaten and raped compared to a real public investment in solar panels?

Pres. Obama is a smart politician. His administration is generally quite appropriate. Way smarter and far less shifty than Bush’s appointees. We shall see after four years how things are going.

One thing that I know is that I have never seen a leader so smug and incoherent as that last dud we had for eight years and I think that Bush was wily more than smart. Pres. Obama is coherent, he thinks about what he says and does for a while before he acts–usually. Not in this case, he appears hypocritical but perhaps for good reason. Those reasons might be as transparent as he says. They would only further the embarrassment of America.

I am sure that is true. For what else could such information accomplish other than put an exclamation point on something that has enough emphasis already!

Eh, the decision is terribly idealistic, but it is pragmatic. Admit that in the past you have acted like a bastard, say you are sorry, and then try and not hand over any more PR victories to your enemies.

After having come clean about what happened, what is there to gain by releasing the pictures and tying more emotion to the topic? I ask this question in a completely non-rhetorical manner because there might be a good answer. The best answer I have is that some ugly pictures might convince the American people that torture is bad, but you just need to realize that you are going to pay a price for this elsewhere in the world.

Bigger fish to fry shouldn’t mean a get out a jail free card.

Well, I’m out.

Xeni draws a false dichotomy when she calls these arguments b/s. Sure a greater respect for the rule of law in the US would help restore its reputation around the world. But it wouldn’t stop these photos being used as recruiting tools for extremists. The best solution would have been for the abuse never to have happened – but Obmama must face the real politic that publishing these photos would put people in danger…

You’re talking about looking the other way so you can get cheaper insurance rates and lower electricity bills. You’re talking not only about the office of President being “bigger than Bush”, but also bigger than the rule of law.

Accusing people of agreeing with Hannity is rich, coming from somebody who’s channelling Nixon.

Just because the guy I voted for won doesn’t mean I’m going to hold him to a lesser standard.

He will, however, help with the 70%
population mortality that is in the
global pipes.

By not releasing the photographs we/the media/opponents of the Obama administration are free to speculate on what they might contain; perhaps they depict far worse atrocities than have been admitted; perhaps senior military figures would be compromised; perhaps claims by prisoners that have been dismissed would be supported. And so on.

In this situation, there is more to gain by being open than closed.