of course, since they don't reflect badly on GWB, i doubt mainstream media will run them wall-to-wall, 24/7, or that we'll see long NYTimes editorials denouncing the depraved culture that made them possible. will the economist run a cover story saying "Saddam, Glad He's Gone?" oh, and before you bash the source, what are you going to say when the pictures are actullay shown? http://rogerlsimon.com/archives/00000951.htm -- 05/14/2004: The Real Picture Show I don't often get scoops on this site and there is no reason you should trust me, but I have one today. The following events ... light years beyond what you have seen from our troops in Abu Ghraib... are now in the hands of the new Arab-language Television network Alhurra. They are videotapes and, in one grisly case, photographs. These are all acts performed by Saddam's soldiers and police in uniform. I am not sure what Al Ahurra will broadcast, but they will be culled from among the following. I am told that when their people saw these tapes, they were unable to watch them. I can understand why. It is hard for me to type them. First, the photographs. They are of actual live castrations of Kurds. Now, the video tapes: Two beheadings, during one of which "Happy Birthday, Saddam" is being sung in Arabic. Fingers being cut off one by one from a hand tied to a board. People being thrown off four-story buildings, one forced to wear a Superman costume. A man scourged ninety-nine times. Three different instances of gas poisonings (probably employing different types), including dead babies. There may be more. I don't know. I would like to know if any of these torturers is actually in Abu Ghraib right now. Let's hope they were not among those let out. I also would like to know what Senator Kennedy has to say about the moral equivalence of our actions after watching these tapes. And finally, I would like to know why it took so long for these to come out.
Are you using SH's crazier actions to somehow justify the crazy acts of a few bad eggs on our side? Kennedy is an a-hole, but so were those soldiers. And Saddam was ever a bigger a-hole. The moral equivalence? BOTH SIDES WERE WRONG. Two wrongs don't make a right. But damn that stuff is sick and twisted.
you're missing the point. i'm not trying to justify the actions of the soldiers at abu ghraib, nothing could. just testing the media's double standard, and wonder if anyone in the media will highlight whose actions ended both instances of abuse? the US military.
Such a weird crusade some of you guys are on, basso. Most of us have known a long time Saddam was a bad man -- maybe this is new news to you. It's not a surprise to me he behaved criminally, since I've known him to be a criminal going way back to the days when we paid him and gave him weapons to aid him in it. The surprise was when our guys did it under the guise of liberators. That's why it's a bigger story. In other news, how do you feel about passing up three chances at a top terrorist in order to use his continued existence as an argument to invade Iraq? Haven't seen you around that thread. Would love to hear your take.
basso, I applaud the attention to this, because before you finish speaking, it seems there are those who say: "I know, I know..Stop..stop, Basso. We already know this like the back of our hand or something"... But the point is the exposure of this really isn't talked about in the media, past, present or future...CNN never ran this story as much as what happened recently...Why? The American common folk knows more about the mistreatment photos, than a common generalization of the extensivity of what was allowed before regarding the backing of the Saddam government... This is a good example of the unbalanced information that national media deems allowable...
Basso, I don't understand how you can't grasp the concept that is grasped by 80% of America, including apparently even the President and his secretary of Defense: that the standards of behavior set for American soldiers is light years ahead of the standard set for crazed Islamic terrorist/murderers or evil dictators. (BTW, I'm sure there's some video tape of steadfast American ally Islam Karimov's forces torturing poor uzbeks, where is your and Ted Kennedy's outrage?) Accordingly, recent and ongoing human rights violations by Americans (over whom we actually excercise control) is necessarily more relevant to public discourse than tapes of some sicko dictator killing people from several years ago. You can dress it up as an exploration of media bias, but I doubt that's what you're really going for here. It's not as if the beheading didn't receive equally gruesome media coverage over the last few days as have the prison photos, and I doubt you could have failed to notice this.
Really? You hadn't heard about Saddam's attrocities before? The massacres of the Kurds and Shiites following the first Gulf War were widely reported. Ironically it was only the liberal fringe that was reporting Saddam's attrocities back in the late '80s when he was gassing the Kurds and Iranians. Of course then we supported him. The point that y'all trying to excuse such things is that its a fact that Saddam's regime is gone. We took him out but that doesn't give us a free pass to torture prisoners in his prisons now. As other's have stated. If you think it is OK that we abuse prisoners in all sorts of depraved ways because Saddam was much worse you must have a pretty low moral standard of our troops.
ironic, isn't it, that the only people who have suggested such things are liberals, trying to paint conservatives as morally challeneged. much like the whole "patriotism" debate.
ironic, isn't it, that the only people who have suggested such things are liberals, trying to paint conservatives as morally challeneged. Except it's not. Both T_J and NJRocket have argued the "look what Saddam did" card when talking about the photos. Here's a great quote: http://bbs.clutchcity.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=77390&perpage=30&pagenumber=6 GreenVegan: <I>How does that make it right for us to torture people?</I> NJRocket: <I>how does it make it wrong? why should we play by the rules while they take advantage of our law abiding asses?</I> Here's a perfect example of someone saying we should do it and justifying it by the fact they did.
What?????? Somebody has not been reading any of the threads on this board, or listening to Hannity or Rush, or reading the New York Post, or listening to Senator Inhofe.............etc.
Yeah, this is bizarre as hell. I've always considered basso a sort of milquetoast right-winger, frustratingly obtuse but mostly harmless. But I had no idea his level of reading comprehension was so sadly deficient. Is the public school system culpable, or was basso home-schooled like an increasing number of the offspring of derechistas? Either way, my sympathies.
I'm not the one who suggested this. You're basically saying that in your own posts. Your beef apparently is that too much attention is being paid on the abuse conducted by US troops when more should be paid on Iraqi abuses because in comparison the US abuses will seem comparatively tame. If not then what is your point?
Ho ho ho! Look at the liberals here scramble to try to defend their politicizing of the Abu Ghraib photos. It's amazing how these liberals take events which cast Americans and American troops in a poor light and use them to try to score political points. It's laughable how they honestly believe they can rationalize their behavior -- some of them even argue until they are red-faced that they are right! I scoff at this! When you are desperately trying to win an election, you will say and equate anything. Ted ChappaKennedy is evidence of that. He is really the mouthpiece for the lunatic fringe, and he also serves as John Forbes Kerry's political mentor. This type of extremism is not what we need in government, and the people will recognize such. According to Forbes Kerry's mentor, castrations and beheadings are far less serious offenses than nudie pyramids or panty-face poses. Those torture chambers are reopened under new management! They've really stepped up the atrocities!! Keep up the hilarious entertainment you are providing, liberals. I love watching people argue from an indefensible position.
This stuff is awful, but just a quick recap of what makes something newsworthy: Scale Relevance Relative Newness Timiliness In this case, the first MIGHT apply, the second definitely does, the third somewhat applies and the fourth does not. On scale, it could be argued that this was widespread and needs attention (key emphasis on WAS). On relevance, it certainly deserves time because it is relevant to the current war in Iraq. On newness, well, this is OLD news. The discovery of the phots and videos is new, but it is THE DISCOVERY that is new, not the information or story. There have been reports of this for years. As to timiliness, it isn't because this has been known about Sadaam for years. On the other hand, the soldier abuse photos rank highly in all four categories, which is exactly why they are getting all the coverage.
