Australian Paper Releases More Abu Ghraib Photos

mykevermin

mykevermin

CAGiversary!
Feedback
34 (97%)
The Article:
http://smh.com.au/news/world/the-photos-america-doesnt-want-seen/2006/02/14/1139890737099.html

The Photos: http://smh.com.au/photogallery/2006/02/15/1139890768970.html

There are apparently 60 photos total, but I'm not certain if that's every picture that's been suppressed, or merely the sum total of photos the paper has.

Needless to say, the photos are graphic. I wish that our soldiers could use their power more wisely, and treat prisoners humanely, but I give a lot of credence to the role-taking results shown in Philip Zimbardo's "Stanford Prison Experiment."

This is to say nothing of either Guantanamo Bay or the various nations to whom the US has engaged in rendition with, or even the several secret prisons the US has established.
 
So much for the pundits saying that Abu Ghraib was "Hazing on the level of a college fraternity".
 
Photo 6 reminds me of Itchy and Scratchy's Unnecessary surgery land.

Also, it doesn't suprise me that these soldiers don't know how to spell "rapist" (image 11).
 
[quote name='kakomu']Photo 6 reminds me of Itchy and Scratchy's Unnecessary surgery land.

Also, it doesn't suprise me that these soldiers don't know how to spell "rapist" (image 11).[/QUOTE]

#-o :wall:

stupid enough to take pictures AND misspell rapist.
 
It is nice to know that the media is willing to take a stand on this issue and publish the photos irregardless of the implications yet they are still too pussy to publish a few cartoons pertaining to a highly relevant news story.
 
[quote name='kakomu']these soldiers don't know how to spell "rapist" (image 11).[/QUOTE]

I just thought they were fans of GG Allin.

Krazy, as I point out on multiple occasions, the paper was Australian, which means from the nation Australia, on the continent Australia. Not part of the United States. Unless you're completely familiar with the news media of an entire nation across the globe, then deriding them for the one issue you seem capable of discussing is inappropriate and inaccurate. I sincerely doubt your knowledge of the news is that thorough as to be able to state, unequivocably, that the Australian media has not shown those cartoons yet.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Krazy, as I point out on multiple occasions, the paper was Australian, which means from the nation Australia, on the continent Australia. Not part of the United States. .[/QUOTE]
Did you figure that out all by yourself? I didn't say anything about the United States now did I?

As far as whether or not the Australian media published the cartoons, I found no reports of any newspapers in Australia publishing them. I did find this however: Don't reprint cartoons: Sheik

It is nice to know they are quick to comply with the demands of Islamic clerics, while on the other hand they'll side with taking someone to court to get inflammatory pictures to publish. That's bullshit plain and simple. One one hand they are quite literally dumb while on the other hand they are vigilant in their attempts to acquire and publish more prisoner abuse photos.

I commented on this issue because I brought up the comparison early on, when pointing out that the media usually relishes stories that provoke a strong reaction.

I support the right of the media to publish these photos, but I also believe that they shouldn't be slanted in what they choose to publish. If it is so damned important to see even more prisoner abuse photos, then it is just as important for people to see the cartoons people are rioting over so they can make a judgement on them. For one to be worthy of publishing and the other taboo speaks to the two-faced nature of the media.
 
Let's see - cartoons that don't mean anything vs. prisoner torture and abuse that violate the Geneva Conventions and International Law. Damn, I can't figure out why they would choose to publish one over the other either, krayz3.
 
I understand the argument he's trying to make, but he also made an argument whose truth resides on knowing, without a doubt, that no Australian newspaper had published the cartoons.

It also overgeneralized "the media" to an egregious extent that goes beyond the typical overgeneralization of "the media" (referring to American news) that implies such homogeny amongst them. But I digress.
 
[quote name='KrAzY3']It is nice to know that the media is willing to take a stand on this issue and publish the photos irregardless of the implications yet they are still too pussy to publish a few cartoons pertaining to a highly relevant news story.[/QUOTE]
Either way, they're pissing off Muslims. You should be happy.

Maybe this is just Australia's way of telling Muslims, "You only thought you furious before with the cartoons. Wait until you see these."
 
[quote name='MrBadExample']Either way, they're pissing off Muslims. You should be happy.

Maybe this is just Australia's way of telling Muslims, "You only thought you furious before with the cartoons. Wait until you see these."[/QUOTE]

Well, I for one completely condemn the prisoner abuses. People SHOULD be pissed off at that and I can't even argue that much with a violent reaction (provided it is not targeted at uninvolved people). I suppose, considering my stance on the other issue it might seem odd that I sympathize with the Muslims as much on this issue but the abuse was offensive to all my sensibilities. It was cruel, sadistic, stupid, pointless and counterproductive. In effect it went against common western values.

On the other hand, I think the cartoons symbolized a common western value, which is freedom of expression and freedom of press. We make fun of stuff, we consider it a right to be offensive. From Larry Flynt to Monty Python, western culture is heavily influenced by people that push the envelope. In order for us to co-exist peacefully with Muslims, they need to learn, in the least to tolerate us living our lives the way we see fit.

I don't want to offend Muslims for the sake of doing it. I do however want us (the "west") to stand our ground on issues of free speech and freedom of expression. As far as the prisoner abuse goes, it was reprehensible and as you said it does give them good reason to be upset rather than just piss off the nut jobs and allow them to show their "true colors". My complaint on this issue just stems from the medias zeal in regards to the abuse photos contrasted with such hesitation in regards to the cartoons.

In the big picture the cartoons symbolize as much if not more than the abuse photos because in the end the abuse photos involve only a handful of countries while the cartoon photos have involved numerous European and Middle East countries and represent a greater set of ideals. Almost no one is defending the prisoner abuse, while the cartoons present a battle of freedom of expression vs Islamic values, something that hypothetically affects billions of people.

in either case, I'll stop hijacking this topic...
 
[quote name='2poor']i dont think that guy was a licensed dentist...[/QUOTE]
Well, NOW I'm not clicking on the link. Sounds like the movie "Hostel" or something.
 
[quote name='E-Z-B']Let's see - cartoons that don't mean anything vs. prisoner torture and abuse that violate the Geneva Conventions and International Law. Damn, I can't figure out why they would choose to publish one over the other either, krayz3.[/QUOTE]

Come back to us when you find Geneva Conventions that apply to un-uniformed enemy combatants okay?

Until then, this argument is null and void.

Oh, and liberal claptrap.
 
I've said repeatedly and I'll say it again.

I don't care what they do to them. I'm not morally outraged and I don't give a fuck. For all I care they can round up these terror suspects and make them into Alpo.

My position hasn't changed and it has nothing to do with party politcs.

If they were Iraqi soldiers, uniformed soldiers, captured during military operations or at the end of a battle I would insist they be given full consideration of the Geneva Conventions. There's a world of difference between a soldier fighting for his country, even with a despotic government, and a terrorist.

If we went to war with Syria, Iran or North Korea the Genva agreements being routinely abused would piss me off. This, this doesn't bother me in the least.

According to the Geneva Conventions you want to see what it's legal to do to an un-uniformed combatant?
71757a.jpg


They're lucky they're not being summarily executed.
 
Muslims fly commercial airliners into buildings in New York City. No Muslim outrage.

Muslim officials block the exit where school girls are trying to escape a burning building because their faces were exposed. No Muslim outrage.

Muslims cut off the heads of three teenaged girls on their way to school in Indonesia. A Christian school. No Muslim outrage.

Muslims murder teachers trying to teach Muslim children in Iraq. No Muslim outrage.

Muslims murder over 80 tourists with car bombs outside cafes and hotels in Egypt. No Muslim outrage.

A Muslim attacks a missionary children's school in India. Kills six. No Muslim outrage.

Muslims slaughter hundreds of children and teachers in Beslan, Russia. Muslims shoot children in the back. No Muslim outrage.

Let's go way back. Muslims kidnap and kill athletes at the Munich Summer Olympics. No Muslim outrage.

Muslims fire rocket-propelled grenades into schools full of children in Israel. No Muslim outrage.

Muslims murder more than 50 commuters in attacks on London subways and busses. Over 700 are injured. No Muslim outrage.

Muslims massacre dozens of innocents at a Passover Seder. No Muslim outrage.

Muslims murder innocent vacationers in Bali. No Muslim outrage.

Muslim newspapers publish anti-Semitic cartoons. No Muslim outrage

Muslims are involved, on one side or the other, in almost every one of the 125+ shooting wars around the world. No Muslim outrage.

Muslims beat the charred bodies of Western civilians with their shoes, then hang them from a bridge. No Muslim outrage.

Newspapers in Denmark and Norway publish cartoons depicting Mohammed. Muslims are outraged.

Muslims are treated to 1/100th of a percent of the humilation, death and destruction they visit on the rest of the world. Muslims are outraged.

fuck them.
 
Funny thing that "making sense" involves the willingness to not only kill every last Muslim, but a complete indifference to the methods used to harm them.

So, was "spreading freedom and democracy" just code language, guys? After all, this certainly isn't doing the US any favors in gaining a positive reputation amongst middle easterners. Keep these photographs in mind the next time you want to accuse the media of helping stir up anti-American sentiment; the photos do what no media can, certainly.
 
You know mykey, these photos aren't new. They aren't from a new event. They aren't from a continued abusive policy of the U.S. military.

The people responsible for these actions have already been demoted, discharged, tried, convicted and serving jail time.

This really is a big non-story.
 
Since the Pentagon's first step after Abu Ghraib hit the papers was to ban all cameras, we don't know that things have really cleaned up, do we?
 
To the one complaining about slanting, it wouldn't be so slanted if the soldiers didn't engage in such behavior. Do you think the military is going to improve such things unless they're forced?

And hooker, don't plagiarize. At least credit your rants to the original author. That's posted word for word on other websites. The only think you added was "fuck them".
 
Homer: Lisa, the whole reason we have elected officials is so we don't have to think all the time. Just like that rainforest scare a few years back. Our officials saw there was a problem and they fixed it, didn't they?
Lisa: No, Dad, I don't think--
Homer: Ah-ah! There's that word again.

Just because it's been out of sight for awhile doesn't mean the problem's fixed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top