Abu Graib Photos

the pierce gazette | 9-30-05 | Ted Pierce

[tpierce98]

His Arrogance, U.S. District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein and the self-aggrandizing ACLU know that the psychotic islamofascists will be inflamed by the redundant Abu Graib photos.

[tpierce98]

His Arrogance, U.S. District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein and the self-aggrandizing ACLU know that the psychotic islamofascists will be inflamed by the redundant Abu Graib photos.

They want to amplify the military’s misdeeds. He and his progressive judicial ilk feel they are not just superior to ordinary Americans they are superior to America.

[tomahawk]

The blood of Americans who get murdered for these photos being made public is on the ACLU's and judge's hands.

[Brilliant]

Since the Judge and the ACLU like these photos so much, I think we should make a few million copies and send them to them in the mail for the next 20 or 30 years.

[Stu Cohen]

The photos are what they are. I don't think that they should be censored (a/la China and certain Muslim countries).

If the events occured, and someone caught them on film, they shouldn't be withheld because someone might be offended.

If they didn't do those things, there would be no pictures.

Putting your head in the sand doesn't mean that it didn't happen, and doesn't mean that the world should not see them. They should. And we should see theirs when it's captured on film. We did parade Saddam around in his underwear for the tabloids.

[elhombrelibre]

This cannot serve any useful purpose other than to inflame the illiterates that will believe this was official policy of the US government (not just the Liberals, I mean the ones in Iraq). As an American in Iraq, I find it unbelievable that this judge would do something that endangers even more Americans here.

[conserv13]

I'm with you. We'll both get flamed. I hope you have asbestos underwear on.

[darkwing104]

Must be trying to satisfy their own Homo erotic fantasies...

[b4its2late]

How can we stop it?

[elhombrelibre]

Yeah, and people should be able to yell fire in a crowded building. It's just a word. People have rights to say words. Consequences don't matter.

[MinuteGal]

O'Reilly is on this story like white on milk. If looks could kill, his slimy civil rights guest last night would be dead by a thousand panty tortures.

I've never seen a more deadly look on anyone's face like that on O'R's during the interview.

Leni

[hgro]

Furnishing fodder to terrorists doesn't serve any purpose whatsoever. Where do all of the nutcases come from.

[Eagle of Liberty]

O'Reilly did call it right. These pictures uncover NO NEW STORY. This story has already been told. We have all heard it and seen examples of the deeds. Nothing was hidden. These new pictures just pile on an already-told story. This is just a chance for NYT to spend another 50 front page articles on the "immoral nature" of Americans.

[darkwing104]

This is just a chance for NYT to spend another 50 front page articles on the "immoral nature" of Americans.

Just in time for the midterm elections of 2006.

[Ignatius J Reilly]

It's amazing how many here are in favor of censorship. Good post.

[San Jacinto]

Yes. What happened at Abu Grahib happened, and when (or if) these pictures are paraded forth, more will happen. The Islamo-fascist Jihadis will use them to fan hatred of America and more bombs will go off and more people will die if the pictures are released than if they are not released. Our difficult tasks in Iraq will be made more difficult.

The idiots who committed the Abu Grahib "atrocities" have already been punished. The half-wit looking Lyndie England just started serving her 3 year stretch.

As far as what happened to the Abu Grahib prisoners (many of whom were probably complicit in killing American soldiers) is no big deal as far as I'm concerned. In the Arab world, however, it is a real big deal. The only purposes motivating the ACLU and the Clinton-Judge are to (1) weaken America internationally, (2) aid the terrorists in Iraq, (2) give Splash-boy and Turbin more fodder for Senate speeches and (3) provide the NY Slimes with another 52 straight days of Front Page coverage of this "massive news event".

I say screw the ACLU, screw the judge, and for that matter, screw the jihadists who had to wear panties on their heads.

[smith288]

You know what this type of "torture" says to me? War sucks and our enemies are more vicious than this. They can suck on it for all I care.

[Stu Cohen]

Yeah, and people should be able to yell fire in a crowded building. It's just a word. People have rights to say words. Consequences don't matter.

Showing someone pictures of a factual news event is not the same as yelling fire in a crowded theater.

Everything offends someone.

[Stu Cohen]

Furnishing fodder to terrorists doesn't serve any purpose whatsoever.

It's not only "terrorists" who will see it. 99.999% of the people who see the pictures will not be terrorists.

Should we censor everything that might offend "terrorists"?

Where do all of the nutcases come from.

Should we censor all information to prevent the formation of "nutcases"?

[elhombrelibre]

Sure it does. Would you also insist, then, that the public see kiddie porn? After all, it may offend some but who am I to say that's beyond the pale? Our how about court pictures of a rape victim. The pictures might offend the woman, but everything offends someone. And if these abu Graib pictures inspire our enemies and make it easier for them to recruit more mass murderers, well it's all academic to you. After all, everything offends someone, why worry about offending Iraqis whom we hope to turn against the Islamic radicals. You must be a super sophist with your outlook, a real deep thinker.