It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by LucidDreamer85
Originally posted by Layla
I don't know about you, but I certainly don't want to see those pictures. I think keeping the video or pictures locked up IS the right thing to do. Should the INFO be out? ABSOLUTELY, but there is no reason to release footage like that to the public. IMO, it only exploits those children further.
Released in a courtroom for witnesses to see . yes. to the public no. Thats just wrong if you want to see that or hear it .
Originally posted by DarkStormCrow
Seymour Hersh is a proven liar and actually has admitted as much in the past just look him up on Wiki and follow the links given.
Hersh, like most investigative journalists, makes frequent reference to anonymous sources in his reporting; some have criticized this usage, implying that some of these sources are unreliable or even made up. In a review of Hersh's book, Chain of Command, conservative commentator Amir Taheri wrote, "As soon as he has made an assertion he cites a "source" to back it. In every case this is either an un-named former official or an unidentified secret document passed to Hersh in unknown circumstances... By my count Hersh has anonymous 'sources' inside 30 foreign governments and virtually every department of the U.S. government."
Those who criticize Hersh's credibility especially point to allegations Hersh has made in public speeches and interviews, rather than in print. In an interview with New York magazine, Hersh made a distinction between the standards of strict factual accuracy for his print reporting and the leeway he allows himself in speeches, in which he may talk informally about stories still being worked on or blur information to protect his sources. "Sometimes I change events, dates, and places in a certain way to protect people... I can’t fudge what I write. But I can certainly fudge what I say."
Originally posted by detachedindividual
This is sickening.
Now I understand why Obama doesn't want this out, this would, in one single strike, create thousands, if not millions, of potential threats to America.
This would radicalize many.
Obama should release the information (not any images or identities), and he should state, without any shadow of doubt, that the Bush administration, all of them, will face charges.
Then he needs to repeat that the Obama administration is a new start. He needs to make it clear that America has changed. His current inaction, in light of these leaks, will only erode the image of Obama and America even further. He simply has to be open and honest and hold those responsible accountable for their actions.
If he doesn't, and this is already leaking, it will make millions enraged against America, and it will show that Obama is no different to Bush. He has no sense of justice unless he makes the previous government, their military leaders and those soldiers on the ground, pay for what they have done to those kids, those innocent people and the image of America around the world.
BUSH AND HIS CRONIES HAVE TO PAY!
Originally posted by jd140
reply to post by Exuberant1
Some of Hersh's speeches concerning the Iraq War have described violent incidents involving U.S. troops in Iraq. In July 2004, during the height of the Abu Ghraib scandal, he alleged that American troops sexually assaulted young boys:
“ Basically what happened is that those women who were arrested with young boys, children, in cases that have been recorded, the boys were sodomized, with the cameras rolling, and the worst above all of them is the soundtrack of the boys shrieking. That your government has. They’re in total terror it’s going to come out. ”
In a subsequent interview with New York magazine, Hersh regretted that "I actually didn’t quite say what I wanted to say correctly...it wasn’t that inaccurate, but it was misstated. The next thing I know, it was all over the blogs. And I just realized then, the power of—and so you have to try and be more careful." In his book, Chain of Command, he wrote that one of the witness statements he had read described the rape of a boy by a foreign contract interpreter at Abu Ghraib, during which a woman took pictures.
Your source regretted saying what he did because he didn't say it correctly. Saying it wasn't THAT inaccurate, but it was misstated.
I guess the part where he said the American Soldiers was the one doing the raping was inaccurate.
He hasn't ever been realy clear on what was "that inaccurate" or what was "misstated".
So I guess he left it that way so that you can come up with your own interpertation.
I don't exactly call that reliable.
Originally posted by Ron Paul Girl
reply to post by Chevalerous
This is vile. I think they ought to admit what they've done, the president shoudl apologize on behalf of our country and the footage should be destroyed. No one needs to see that. Disturbing. Disgusting. Why did they even video tape it? This is evil to the core and people really need to see that our government is capable of such things and of covering them up.
Originally posted by jd140
reply to post by Chevalerous
I'm not saying that first testimony is true or not.
But, don't you find the use of the F word a little unprofessional for a legal statement?
He said an American told him to be like homosexuals, his own words. Then in paranthesis, which is there for clarification, is F@#king.
Just struck me as an odd thing for the person who typed it up to put that word in their instead of a more acceptable word to clarify what was trying to be said.