FURIOUS BUSH DEMANDS TO SEE ALL PRISONER ABUSE PHOTOS, VIDEOS

Drudge ^ | 5/9/04 | Matt Drudge

[demkicker]

A furious President Bush has demanded to see all photos and videos showing abuse of Iraq detainees, a senior White House source said late Sunday.

"The president was blindsided by the first TV images, he will not be blindsided again," the source, who demanded anonymity, explained to the DRUDGE REPORT.

The president has instructed Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld to present him with him all known images that could further deepen the crises.

Monday editions of the NEW YORKER feature photos of a dog attacking a naked Iraqi detainee at Abu Ghraib prison.

President Bush was aware of the photo, the top source claims.

The White House is preparing for more fallout, and leaks from lawmakers.

The Pentagon is considering the possibility of showing the unseen material to members of Congress.

"It's clear the moment the evidence is sent to the Congress, we will see a new feeding frenzy in the media."

[NYC GOP Chick]

That's her story.

[Matchett-PI]

"Barney Frank has also demanded to see all the photos, albeit for a different reason."

LOL

Do you think he would agree with Hillary when she said that people don't need to see the pictures to be "revulsed". That just reading descriptions of these pictures is enough to revulse anybody.

Will one of the DemocRAT'S biggest constituancies take kindly to having their behavior described as "revulsive"?

For merely one of many examples that could be given, can we expect to see Hillary also describing the behavior shown in the pictures that were taken during "gay days" on "family friendly" Disney property in Orlando, Fl. as "revulsive"?

I suspect that the DemocRATS are going to live to regret describing the behavior of sado-masochists, et.al., as "revulsive".

[oceanview]

violence is a fairly "generic" trait, in the right circumstances, we are all capable of it (not that I am condoning it mind you) in some form or another.

but this other stuff, something else is going on there.

[FreeReign]

Nothing I have seen so far can be labeled torture, just humiliation. The Geneva Conventions were violated when 60 Minutes II broadcasted the photo's, until then, there was no humiliation shown to the public or the world

And what's more humiliating. Being forced into a naked pyramid formation and having some guards snap your picture or being forced into a naked pyramid formation, having some guards snap your picture and then having the whole world see your picture.

The leaking of the pictures and the viewing of these pictures does violate principles of the Geneva Convention.

There is something hypocritical about publicly releasing pictures that document -- humiliation.

[sinkspur]

If some anonymous man in a bar tells you that he's been taking thousands of digital photos of nude men in his basement, that he's stacked them into nude human pyramids, paraded them around on dog leashes while naked, and even filmed somebody else raping a couple of them...do you suspect this stranger of being gay or straight?

If he happens to be a guard in an all-male prison, in a country against whom we are at war, and he had already been up on charges of beating his wife, I would suspect that this stranger was a criminal, doing what criminals do.

He may be gay or straight.

You appear to be saying that a heterosexual could never have conceived of these brutal actions; that only gays would strip prisoners naked, and sic dogs on them.

Is that what you're saying?

[Joe Hadenuf]

I couldn't agree less. FR is one of the only places I find people who try and downplay just how serious this situation is. The problem isn't the photos, it's that it happened.

I tend to agree. Fag, perverts, nutjobs, whatever took them, the damage is done.

[GB]

If these photos exist, they will come out. There is no way to stop it. I'm surprised that there seemed to be a lack of knowledge among some here about how cheap and easy to use digital cameras and CD burners are these days. You can get a CD burner for $19.95 if you look hard enough, and a 12-year-old can install one, it's so simple. Digital cameras are dirt cheap, I just bought a superb 4 megapixel unit for less than $300. You can take a digital photo, download it to a computer and send it across the universe via e-mail in five minutes. As I said, if the photos exist, they will get out. So I think Bush is doing the right thing here ... dump it all out, take the hit and move forward.

[oceanview]

I don't find that, I think there is a majority of people ready to form a backlash - our contractors are burned and hung from bridges, their bodies ripped apart - and then you see some iraqi on a leash.

[Southack]

"He may be gay or straight. You appear to be saying that a heterosexual could never have conceived of these brutal actions; that only gays would strip prisoners naked, and sic dogs on them. Is that what you're saying?"

No, I'm not saying with 100% certainly that the guy would be gay; only that the reasonable person would strongly *suspect* that he's gay if the guy admits to taking thousands of nude pics, building all male nude human pyramids, parading nude men around on dog leashes, and filming other men perpetrating homosexual rapes.

But gay or straight, that guy needs to be sent away to Levenworth.

[FreeReign]

Uh, 60 Minutes II is not a governmental organization, and as such is not subject to the Convention.

The principles of the Geneva Convention still apply, whether you are legally subject to them or not.

You need to do something about that -- uh -- speech impairment.

[onyx]

GOOD to SEE YOU!

[GB]

It's really sad, because some other folks in the unit who apparently did their jobs were up for a Bronze Star, but it was reported tonight that because of this crap no one in the unit will receive any honors. So the many will suffer for the idiocy of a few.

[GB]

So, how do you enforce them against someone who is not legally subject to them?

[sinkspur]

violence is a fairly "generic" trait, in the right circumstances, we are all capable of it (not that I am condoning it mind you) in some form or another.

I even disagree with THAT! Have you ever been violent with somebody? I mean, really violent? (I'm not talking about spanking a kid now and then.)

I never have, and I've never even been tempted to be violent with anybody.

Maybe I've lived a sheltered life, but, at 53, I know that, unless my life is threatened, some situations are best walked away from.

I'm just not convinced that a shackled, naked man, no matter how large, can do much damage to four or five strapping military grunts.

[plain talk]

I agree. Where is somebody, anybody, out there defending tactics used to break down these prisoners? Taunting them with dogs, taking off their clothes etc is pretty tame stuff and I see no grownups willing to take this on politically. Our society is a bunch of wusses.

[FreeReign]

If these photos exist, they will come out. There is no way to stop it.

Aren't these photos classified?

[strela]

The principles of the Geneva Convention still apply, whether you are legally subject to them or not.

Thank you for your frank albeit tortured admission that 60 Minutes II is not legally subject to the Geneva Convention.

[FreeReign]

So, how do you enforce them against someone who is not legally subject to them?

The photo's were classified, were they not?

[strela]

Thank you. But I won't be here long.

[longtermmemmory]

(s)you are not allowed to ask, and if you know you are not allowed to tell. You will not be ordered back to sensitivity re-education camp. (/s)