It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

100 new Abu Ghraib pictures/videos to be released of children and women raped

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 6 2005 @ 09:21 PM
link   
A judge has ordered the Bush administration to release more of the Abu Ghraib material, including pictures and videos of women and children being raped by US interrogators. The pictures leave no doubt that detainee abuse in Iraq is more widespread than initially thought. The administration has announced it would not comply with the court's ruling.
 



news.independent.co.uk
A US judge has ordered the Bush administration to release more than 100 new photographs and videos of abused prisoners at Abu Ghraib, creating a fresh public relations nightmare for government officials as they seek to rebut accusations that the US is sponsoring torture in Iraq, Afghanistan and beyond.
...
But fresh evidence of abuse at Abu Ghraib is likely to complicate Iraq's already precarious security situation. Judge Alvin Hellerstein of the New York federal court granted a petition by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) to release the materials after viewing eight sample photos last week. It is not known exactly what the 144 photographs and videos depict, but they are from the same sources as the graphic images of prisoners being piled up on top of each other, threatened by attack dogs and forced into sexually compromising positions that triggered scandal and outrage just over a year ago.

"These images may be ugly and shocking, but they depict how the torture was more than the actions of a few rogue soldiers," said ACLU director Anthony Romero. "The American public deserves to know what is being done in our name. Perhaps after these and other photos are forced into the light of day, the government will at long last appoint an outside special counsel to investigate the torture and abuse of detainees."

Government lawyers argued that releasing the photographs would reveal the prisoners' identities, a violation of their rights under the Geneva Conventions. But the ACLU said that objection could be easily overcome by blocking out the prisoners' faces. The judge agreed, and gave the White House until the end of the month to hand over the material.

More pointedly, the ACLU also said the government's reasoning was absurd because the violation of the Geneva Conventions began with the abuse, not with attempts to uncover it.

resident Bush has come under increasing scrutiny over his repeated claims to be interested in spreading freedom around the world, most recently in the damning Amnesty International report on conditions at Guantanamo Bay and elsewhere.




Please visit the link provided for the complete story.



Regime change begins at home.




Related News Links:
boingboing.net




[edit on 7-6-2005 by Moretti]

[edit on 24-7-2005 by asala]




posted on Jun, 6 2005 @ 09:33 PM
link   
Your introduction is beyond biased; it is totally unsupported by the article. It is utterly disgraceful.



posted on Jun, 6 2005 @ 09:33 PM
link   

and videos of children shrieking while being sodomized by US interrogators.

I absolutely refuse to beleive that this has happened. IF it did, it has to be released, and the soldiers who did it must all be executed. People freaked out when newsweek reported a poorly verified story, because it 'got people killed'. If this is true, the insurgency in iraq sort of has a good point. These things are not what the US should be doing. Anyone involved in it has to be executed and anyone in direct command of those peopele has to be stripped of rank and sent to prison for dereliction of duty for the rest of their lives and anyone even indirectly responsible for that prison needs to be harshly punished and the prison itself has to be burnt to the ground.

Also, every place where the US keeps detainees of any sort has to be completely opened to international humanitarian agencies. Too much, some say? Children screaming while being sodomized by US Soldiers and Contractees would be too much.

These charges are so absolutely horrible as to be almost entirely unbeleivable, and if they are true, then something is fundamentally wrong with the entire process and system.



posted on Jun, 6 2005 @ 09:37 PM
link   
Grady, you are a hundred percent correct. The introductory paragraph is a succint explanation of the article, the article says absolutely nothing about the things mentioned in the opening paragraph.

I made the mistake of voting yes, assuming that the person who wrote the article had been competent enough to properly fill out a submission form.

This is disgusting sensationalism at the expense of possibly horribly treated victims. As long as the intro paragraph remains so horribly and completely inaccurate and disgracefully sensationalistic, everyone else should be voting No:Bias, if for nothing else than to preserve, or helph establish, some sort of integrity for ATSNN.

IOW, Deny Sensationalism and disrespect torwards victims.



posted on Jun, 6 2005 @ 09:44 PM
link   
Whom ever wrote this article, I congratulate you - but I bet you it wont be passed - all these people will vote no, via Bias, or sources... Things like this need to be told...

The very fact that the Republican party is trying to surpress these images from going out suggests that they do infact support terrorism... The men and women who committed these attrocities should be brought to the public - they should be spat on as they walk down the streets - their lives aren't worthy to be in their hands - these people need to be brought to justice... And the current administration should resign, if it cannot make good with this issue - then they do not deserve to be in power... It goes against everything the US was created on...

What ever happended to peace, liberty, freedom and the American way...



posted on Jun, 6 2005 @ 09:58 PM
link   
Becareful ghost...

There's a thin line between propaganda and news. Until any of that stuff is proven and not remain baseless claims...this is not news.



posted on Jun, 6 2005 @ 09:58 PM
link   
I think whomever is politically responsible for the torture should also be sacked along the way...

In a side developement : international survey finds 25% of americans mentally ill



posted on Jun, 6 2005 @ 10:00 PM
link   


videos of children shrieking while being sodomized by US interrogators

This is disgusting and far from the truth. There is no evidence to back this up, noone there or anyone on ATS has EVER produced any credible facts and/or proof of these claims. And Im not talking letters from 17 year old Iraqi kids which are comletely made up and unveryfiable.

Grady, You are so right.



The very fact that the Republican party is trying to surpress these images from going out suggests that they do infact support terrorism

Prove these images exist or that these acts ever happened.



The men and women who committed these attrocities should be brought to the public - they should be spat on as they walk down the streets - their lives aren't worthy to be in their hands - these people need to be brought to justice

Well I agree with you 110%. People who do such things should handled for more harsh than you described.

[edit on 6/6/2005 by SportyMB]



posted on Jun, 6 2005 @ 10:42 PM
link   
I agree that the post is biased, but look at this for hypocritical...


Government lawyers argued that releasing the photographs would reveal the prisoners' identities, a violation of their rights under the Geneva Conventions.


Thats a weak excuse to hide behind when they didn't give a damn before....

The American military is its own worst enemy. Its own actions have created its enemy.
Forget about being a muslim insurgent, after the military's actions in Iraq, even local non muslims would stand and fight.



posted on Jun, 6 2005 @ 11:02 PM
link   
While I agree that the Bush administration has handled this incident horribly, I don't believe that any good can come from the release of more abuse pictures. The only thing that this will accomplish is more rioting and death. There definitely needs to be a better investigation into these matters, with more details made available, but the release of more images would just fuel hatred. Also, it is getting absolutely outrageous the extent some politically biased news organizations will go to blast their opposition and I’m talking about Republicans and Democrats. At what point are these people going to wake up, get a conscious, and realize that their actions harm others. In my opinion, these organizations, that print these biased stories, need to be held responsible for the problems they create. There needs to be more responsibility in today’s journalism.



posted on Jun, 6 2005 @ 11:11 PM
link   
As far as i can see it, the article just plainly represents the truth. What you are in essence saying is that you don't want a free and objective press reporting on governemental crimes.

The story is half a day old and already being reported by Reuters, AP, USA Today, Boston globe, etc...


[edit on 6-6-2005 by Moretti]



posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 03:46 AM
link   
All pictures should be released, all. No exceptions. Release them to the general American public.

Their argument makes the problem go away, but it doesn't bring justice. The abuse of prisoners is despicable behavior, it's just not how you act in war if you want to maintain the moral high ground. If we want to keep calling ourselves the good guys, we have to act a certain way.

If the pictures are real, they show offenders, theoretically. Of course they may have been taken in such a manner as to obscure faces and make identification impossible. In any case, release the pictures, edited, to remove the faces of the victims. Then nobody's rights are being violated. I would think this would be a good idea if the victim is a woman, because releasing their face might cause a lot of problems for them in their communities. If it would do the victims more good to conceal their identities, it should be done.

I think the pictures are likely enough to turn you off your lunch, if the gvt. is so scared of releasing them. That being said, if we know this, do we need to see them? Some will simply rationalize it away as a few bad apples and maintain their unwavering support for this psychotic regime. Wouldn't releasing the pictures be preaching to the choir in way? Yeah..but...

I think the American people have a right to know exactly what sort of brutality they're financing with their hard earned dollars. The victims have a right to justice, nobody can deny that. Both ends are served by release of the photos.

If this is just pure sensationalism..how would we ever know unless the photos are released? If they are indeed vanilla in comparison to these allegations, then perhaps releasing them would do more good than harm, in terms of calming this talk of child rape (unique to the poster, not mentioned in the article). To think people are raping children under the banner of the US..that's a very disturbing thought, it might cause people to react badly, real badly. I think something needs to be done to dispel this nightmare before it attains corporeal form. A rumor like that does damage...

I won't say it's impossible, but I do find it improbable that the photos depict US servicemen or contractors raping children. Improbable..but war does strange things to some men. It's not outside the realm of possibility. Release the photos, do whatever it takes to get to the bottom of this. I think that's the bottom line.

[edit on 7-6-2005 by WyrdeOne]



posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 03:53 AM
link   
The source article here and the secondary supporting article / introduction paragraph are strikingly unrelated. What gives?

The poster of this news story based the introduction paragraph on the secondary source, which is completely biased and full of uncorroborated claims. The primary source article says nothing about rape or sodomy at all.

The secondary source provides no evidence whatsoever for its claims. It is just a collection of people's testimony and speeches. Parts of it make no sense at all, like the profane account of the rape of a prisoner concluding with "[the rapist] was acting homosexual (gay)..." Just kind of tacked on at the end, there, eh? That account obviously came from a highly biased prisoner.

Even still, though, things don't look that bad, if you ignore the unbelievable stories and just accept those that sound halfway-believable:



who have seen and have heard of a boy and a 12 year old girl terrified (cold water and mud were spilled over them) by guards or military personal.


They "have seen and have heard of" this? Okay, guys, it's one or the other... Cold water and mud spilled over them? Well that's not rape, right?

Guys, something like this doesn't have to be public to be investigated. If children or adults were really raped at Abu Ghraib, then you can and should trust the military to investigate and prosecute. Fortunately, it appears as though these events simply did not happen.

EDIT: Just to be clear, I'm speaking strictly about the intro paragraph and secondary source. As far as the primary source goes, I think the pictures should be released and justice served - but it should be clear that the photos we're talking about don't necessarily contain images of rape.

Zip

[edit on 6/7/2005 by Zipdot]



posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 04:00 AM
link   
I agree WyrdeOne.

Edit out the faces, if there is nothing to hide, release the photos.



posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 05:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
As long as the intro paragraph remains so horribly and completely inaccurate and disgracefully sensationalistic, everyone else should be voting No:Bias


I don't understand this...? I don't see any edit stamps on the article and I can't see anything remotely horrible or disgraceful in the intro?



A judge has ordered the Bush administration to release more of the Abu Ghraib material, including pictures and videos of women and children being raped by US interrogators. The pictures leave no doubt that detainee abuse in Iraq is more widespread than initially thought. The administration has announced it would not comply with the court's ruling.


The only thing I'd call biased is the bolded words, maybe change them to may indicate and the paragragh would read neutral.

Was it already changed??



posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 05:40 AM
link   
This submission is a total sham since the claims made in both the title and the intro aren't supported by the source article.


[edit on 6/7/2005 by djohnsto77]



posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 05:40 AM
link   
mythatsabigprobe
Where in the article does it say there are photos depicting rape?

That's why it's biased. The author is adding their own news, tarting up the headline a bit to make it more sensational.

Edit: The allegations of rape and child rape were made my Seymour Hersh, in a speech to the ACLU, according to the supporting link. He's no journalistic slouch, got the big prize in 1970, according to the link below he got a handful of other awards as well. I still question the veracity of his source.

www.twbookmark.com...

Does anyone else think it's odd that the guy who broke Mai Lai also broke Abu Ghraib? Seems a little coincidental..doesn't it?

[edit on 7-6-2005 by WyrdeOne]



posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 06:04 AM
link   
mythatsabigprobe:

Yep, pretty much like everyone has been saying, if you click on the source article and hit CTRL-F to do a text search for the words "rape" or "sodomy", you will get no results. The intro paragraph is crap.

Zip



posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 06:23 AM
link   
Ok, now I see it. Thanks guys. I thought Seymour Hersh would have cited some sources or evidence, guess I shouldn't have assumed anything.



posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 07:40 AM
link   
Question to the mods here.
Since the title as well as the intro have nothing to do with the source. Why has this submission not been sent to file 13 (trash) I have seen much better submissions given that fate.
To the author, Your intro alledges that "new" photos and videos of the rape of women and children. The source that you have given has absolutely nothing to do with any of your statements. Your related link (which is where you gathered your "info") is from statments that are nearly a year old. Everyone of the people that have made these statments have also stated that there was proof. Question.... after nearly a year where's the proof?







 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join