Counterpoint: Why The Abu Ghraib Photos Should Not Be Released

In yesterday's New York Times, author Philip Gourevitch puts forward the case for keeping the never-seen images of prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib prison locked up. The points are well taken, and echo the arguments that President Obama made during his national security speech last week: 1) the images will not tell us anything we don't already know; and 2) they will enflame America's enemies and put American troops in danger.
     Gourevitch knows the subject: he authored a book with filmmaker Errol Morris called The Ballad of Abu Ghraib, telling the story of the soldiers who took the images that helped turned public opinion against the conflict in Iraq. As he says, he "spent more than a year living with the photographs from Abu Ghraib...." Like the president, he does not specify exactly how the images would endanger troops;  no one has yet presented evidence that the photographs would cause immediate and certain harm; the threat is vague and generalized. His argument that the pictures would not add to the public knowledge or debate is also one-sided, since the images remain classified. Who is to say what information they may provide and what effect they would have on the debate regarding the use of torture? (President Obama countered that the debate is effectively over, because he has outlawed the use of torture.)
     More complex, and winning, is Gourevitch's argument about the nature of photographs, and how they can mislead while providing vital information. The photos from Abu Ghraib were made by soldiers put in a situation they were not trained for, who documented acts by comrades who, in many cases, were following orders from higher-ranking officials.
    "Crime-scene photographs, for all their power to reveal, can also serve as a destraction, even a deterrent, from precise understanding of the events they depict. Photographs cannot show us a chain of command, or Washington decision making. Photographs cannot tell stories. They can only provide evidence of stories, and evidence is mute; it demands interpretation and explanation."
     The images from Abu Ghraid, he says, do not show "that the real bad apples were at the top of the civilian chain of command in Washington." Perhaps seeing the unreleased images would motivate us to learn that story, and not simply forget what happened at Abu Ghraib. Forgetting would be the ultimate failure.--David Schonauer

Comments

[Franklin]

I am going to stretch a little with my analogy here, but it's disgusting how much this reminds me of interviews from the holocaust. The officers - simply "cogs"(right?) in the wheels of death often hid behind the excuse of following orders from superiors.
Sure, they may have been influenced by the cultural wave of Nazism, but in retrospect everyone here involved is guilty. Some apples are worse than others, yes. Still, when your officer asks you to commit a crime against humanity, isn't this contradicting the moral standards you hold as a citizen (never mind soldier) of this country?
Even so, we're not pointing fingers. We know we've made a mistake. These photographs serve as evidence that the culture of fear has reached a high mark - high enough that we've seem to have forgotten our conscience. The prisoners from Abu Ghraib do not have the voices to speak out against the crimes committed against them. Although the pictures may not be explicit in their ability to tell a story, they are tangible evidence that these crimes actually happened. People tend to forget or even doubt what happened in the prison tucked far away from their moral conscience. All we have are the pictures.

[John]

I'm sure we are all curious about the photos but, as they say, curiosity killed the cat.

Apparently, these photos are graphic and possibly offensive to most who would view them. Releasing them to the public would also release them to America's enemies, in particular, the comrades of those who underwent torture in the prison.

Is there any American who was not outraged at seeing an American captive or two who were surrounded by hooded terrorists moments before their heads were cut off? Would not photos of torture victims outrage the enemy so that they might decide to take revenge on our troops?

Above all, does the public have such a need to see the photos that it puts our troops at risk? Haven't we lost enough young men, already?

We've seen what the radicals will do over a damaged Koran. What will they do over a photo of a tortured comrade? We do not have a need to see the photos other than from a voyeuristic point of view.

[jim]

There is simply no excuse in a free society for the government to prevent to the release of photos like these, especially when the photos contain no secret information.

Essentially the government's position is that they don't want to release the photos because they depict injustice that was done to prisoners under U.S. care, which may cause a backlash.

It's an extremely bad precedent when the government can argue that evidence of their own injustice and wrongdoing can't be released *for whatever reason*.

As far as the administration's argument about the debate being "settled," obviously it is not; if the photos contain no new information, then there should be no problem with their release.

If, on the other hand, the photos DO contain more information, then the debate is not settled, and we need to be aware of further injustices committed by our government for the sake of "security." These photos are evidence of possible criminal wrongdoing, and as evidence they must not be suppressed even if they are embarrassing or painful.

Finally, the excuse that the photos will "inflame the Muslim world" is very weak; in case you haven't noticed, the Muslim world is already inflamed. We should never put ourselves in a position where we violate our own policies of transparency and justice because of possible reactions from foreign entities, otherwise *nothing* will every be released.

The release of these photos is an essential part of the resolution of our actions over the last 8 years; we need to cleanse ourselves of this type of behavior, and the only way to do this is to admit that we did wrong and deal with the consequences - not sweep it under the rug and pretend it didn't happen.

[Jesson]

As we know that retired Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba, who oversaw the US investigation into the abuses at Baghdad’s Abu Ghraib prison, was quoted as telling Britain’s Daily Telegraph in an article that he agreed with Obama’s decision not to release the pictures. dental insurance “I am not sure what purpose their release would serve other than a legal one and the consequence would be to imperil our troops, the only protectors of our foreign policy, when we most need them,” chicago investment property Taguba was quoted by the Daily Telegraph. “The mere description of these pictures is horrendous enough, take my word for it.” It was not exactly clear what photos Taguba was referring to. Thanks.

________________
checking account

[penis büyütücü]

penis büyütücü

[göğüs büyütücü]

göğüs büyütücü

[sex shop]

sex shop

[zayıflamak]

zayıflamak

[seks shop]

seks shop

[mahuya]

Wow!!! Really a nice post. Thanks a lot friend. Any way, www.uploaded.tv offers you a golden opportunity to make money online by uploading videos, pictures and musics. Just go through and easy sign up, www.uploaded.tv

[Michael]

I have some photos of frat initiation parties that make Abu Ghraib look like baby pictures.

[Michael]

Let's get that guy in Denmark who made fun of the prophet to release the Abu Ghraib photos. Isn't he hiding somewhere in America?