Is Release of Torture Photos Necessary? The MOMocrats Debate Obama's Decision.

Last Wednesday, under the advice of Pentagon officials, President Obama reversed a decision to comply with an appeals court's May 28th deadline for the public release of dozens photos depicting acts of abuse and torture perpetrated on detainees in U.S. custody by U.S. military personnel. The President now argues the public release of the photos should be withheld from public view because the situations depicted in the photos have already been investigated by the Pentagon, and some of the U.S. personnel who perpetrated the abuses have already been punished. Obama said in a May 13 press statement:

[. . .] this is not a situation in which the Pentagon has concealed or sought to justify inappropriate action. Rather, it has gone through the appropriate and regular processes. And the individuals who were involved have been identified, and appropriate actions have been taken.

It's therefore my belief that the publication of these photos would not add any additional benefit to our understanding of what was carried out in the past by a small number of individuals. In fact, the most direct consequence of releasing them, I believe, would be to further inflame anti-American opinion and to put our troops in greater danger.

Moreover, I fear the publication of these photos may only have a chilling effect on future investigations of detainee abuse. And obviously the thing that is most important in my mind is making sure that we are abiding by the Army Manual and that we are swiftly investigating any instances in which individuals have not acted appropriately, and that they are appropriately sanctioned. That's my aim and I do not believe that the release of these photos at this time would further that goal.

Now, let me be clear: I am concerned about how the release of these photos would be -- would impact on the safety of our troops. I have made it very clear to all who are within the chain of command, however, of the United States Armed Forces that the abuse of detainees in our custody is prohibited and will not be tolerated.

When we at MOMocrats discussed President Obama's decision to fight the court-ordered release of these photos, we discovered that our writers held a range of views on the pros and cons of the President's new position. Here is what six of the MOMocrats had to say about whether or not more photos of U.S. troops abusing and torturing prisoners should be publicly released:

Arguments Against the Release of More Torture Photos

Stefania: I do NOT want to see any torture photos. I am very sensitive (despite all my bluster sometimes) to images that are disturbing.  I can understand the breadth and scope of the problem without seeing any more photos.  I've seen enough photos of war atrocities to last several lifetimes.

Are they going to be worse than anything we've already seen?  Maybe it's too personal an issue for me.  I don't think I can see anything worse than Napalm-stripped Vietnamese children or Jews being shot, 3-4 lined up in a row so the SS could use the same bullet, over an open grave.

Stephanie: In the last few days this has been a hot topic among my military family friends. And most of these people are liberals.  But when my friend who is a military wife and a die hard liberal is talking about the possible repercussions to her husband who is an infantry officer in the most dangerous part of Afghanistan, I get where Joe Lieberman is coming from.

Julie: I believe Obama has a point, here. There is precedent. I also think no right can come from such a very big wrong, other than (a) stopping it pronto an (b) holding culpable those who should be. A is well underway and I think (because of Nixon) B is a pipe dream.

What purpose do the photos serve, if deniability is off the table? What is our goal? Is the goal to prove it happened? Done. Is the goal to prosecute perpetrators? In that case, the photos can be displayed at trial, but not publicly.

Arguments for the Release of More Torture Photos

Joanne: No matter how disturbing the photos, isn't it important to see them?  What if the government had kept photos of the Holocaust, concentration camps and their victims from the world?

What's wrong with the goal of letting us all know exactly what happened to put the record straight after being lied to by Bush for eight years?

Cynematic: I believe it will be difficult, if not impossible for Obama to keep a lid on these pics (and supposedly video of US contractors sodomizing young Iraqi boys, according to a brief mention by Seymour Hersh in Salon some years back).

There are revelations emerging from the Spanish investigation into detainee abuse in which it seems abuse of detainees under Bush is ongoing despite Obama's end to that policy.

And there's the April 21, 2009 McClatchy article as well as more recent testimony that Bush-Cheney used torture to retroactively gather "evidence" justifying the unproveable, because nonexistent, collaboration between bin Laden & Saddam Hussein.

I realize the danger to US troops every time information showing that Bush, as Commander in Chief, asked for torture to be committed. I hate that thanks to Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, the actions of hired mercenaries have clouded the issue of exactly what U.S. servicepeople were commanded to do.

But the majority of Muslims in Europe, Africa and Asia, have come to decry the violence and anti-western hatred associated with al Qaeda's extremism. An author who appears reputable asserts al Qaeda's influence worldwide is waning. I lack the expertise to be the final arbiter, but the initial results of his survey are promising, and if accurate/corroborable, might give us hope that we can convince the world it was the illegal, atrocious actions of the Bush-Cheney administration we now hope to bring to justice by the exposure of what they authorized.

So while there's considerable risk to US troops in releasing the photos, there's also the prospect of letting the initiative for wrestling with our own government's worst transgressions fall to other nations while we stand by. Shouldn't we lead this? Isn't this our responsibility?

Of all the things that infuriate me the most about Bush-Cheney, the thing that still makes me boil over in rage is that almost 4300 American servicepeople gave their lives in good faith, (with the deaths of 100,000 Iraqi civilians in the same period ), but the people who asked for Americans to sacrifice their loved ones acted in bad faith. And members of the Bush-Cheney administration have the temerity to go on TV and defend their actions, as if what they did was defensible.

I've always supported at the very least a Senate Truth Commission, a special prosecutor, and almost beoynd hoping for, a visit to The Hague for Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Wolfowitz, etc. I'm afraid for Nancy Pelosi and any Dems who might get caught up in this, and worried that our window for enacting a new, sweeping, domestic New Deal might be closing.

But it's appalling to me that the Bush Administration — leaders of our country — were the direct cause of so many needless deaths. For those reasons, I feel we need to resolve this before the key players die, forget, or "vanish" the documentation of their deeds.

Jaelithe: Though I certainly understand the fear expressed by the President, some Senators, and members of the Pentagon that release of more photos depicting U.S. soldiers and personnel mistreating and torturing detainees in U.S. custody may cause harm to U.S. troops currently in the field of battle who had nothing to do with these incidents and in fact have conducted themselves appropriately and well, and while I sympathize deeply with the families of soldiers who worry about repercussions for their loved ones, I cannot bring myself to justify continued attempts to hide the evidence of torture of prisoners in U.S. custody from public view on the basis that the sight of these photos may cause anger against the United States.

I think anger against the United States is a justified response to what the United States has done — or rather, to what certain citizens of the United States did under the direction of the Bush Administration, in violation of our own Constitution, our own system of laws, and our treaty agreements with other countries. 

Let us not forget that many of the detainees pictured in these photos were being held in U.S. custody indefinitely, without trial, and in many cases on the basis of incorrect or very flimsy evidence. In other words, some of the people who were imprisoned, stripped naked, beaten, starved and tortured in the name of protecting American citizens were actually innocent people with no real connection to al Qaeda, the Taliban, or any other forces we were supposed to be fighting in Bush's War on Terror.

Let us not forget, either, that some of the detainees subjected to these "enhanced interrogation techniques" were actually children who may have been as young as 12 or 14 at the time of their capture.

People are already angry about these facts. I, as a U.S. citizen, am angry about these facts. And I find that anger to be justified.

Whether or not these additional photos of abused and tortured detainees are released to the public, the truth is that people around the world, based on the evidence that has already been publicly revealed about mistreatment and torture of detainees in U.S. custody, are already angry that these things happened. A substantial number of United States citizens are angry that these things were done in their name. And people from other countries whose fellow citizens were subject to this treatment while in U.S. custody are, of course, justifiably angry about torture. Already. We can't change that fact.

All we can do now to protect our troops from backlash is try to either assuage that anger, or to make sure that the anger is appropriately directed at the people who ordered and committed acts of abuse and torture, and not at U.S. troops in general or at the United States at large.

So I think the question at hand here is not really, "Will the public release of these photos make people angry at the United States?" Because people are already angry at the United States.

I think the questions we need to be asking instead are "How can we best show the world, and our own citizens, that we know what happened under the Bush Administration was wrong? How can we best show that do not want this to happen again? How can we best show the world that we are sorry that it happened?" I think that last part is really the key — how do we show to the world that we are sorry that these acts were committed in our name?

Because I don't think it's enough to say to the world that this won't happen again. If we are going to address the anger people around the world already feel about U.S. government-sponsored torture, we need to make it clear that we understand it never should have happened in the first place.

And I think the best way to do that is to release all of the evidence of mistreatment and torture of detainees in U.S. custody publicly, and to do this knowing that it will shame us, knowing that it might endanger our diplomatic efforts, and might even endanger our troops. I think that in fact the only way to even begin to assuage international anger about the Bush administration's detention and torture policies is to accept responsibility for those policies, in the most open and transparent way possible.

Anyone who has learned how to make a decent apology knows this: If you are going to apologize for a grievous mistake, in order for anyone to take your apology seriously, the very first thing you must do is admit that you were in error and accept responsibility for the negative consequences of that error.

And so I think that people in other countries will not fully accept our assertions that we have turned the page on mistreatment and torture of detainees in our custody until we stop attempting to conceal the evidence of it.

I believe we endanger our troops even more, in the long run, by continuing to conceal evidence of torture than we would by releasing that evidence in good faith now. And really, I worry that people in other countries will not believe we are sincere about ending unlawful treatment of prisoners unless we show we intend hold those who ordered these acts of mistreatment and torture responsible for breaking international laws.

Comments

[Julie Pippert]

It sounds inhumane to say it's a weighting of risk v. benefit, of action v. reaction, and yet, in a way, that's what it boils down to.

The most compelling argument I've heard in favor of releasing them anyway mentioned specifically that hardcore images such as those cannot be mitigated.

Initially, I asked about issues of deniability, but in truth, it's about issues of degree and culpability. People can continue to say that it was necessary etc. so long as they don't really know how far it went, and how unproductive it was. A picture is worth a thousand words.

In all of those, there must be some that do not reveal specific identities (no need to victimize twice sort of thought there) of any in the photo, but it needs to e a controlled release.

I'd like Karl Rove's photo next to an image he was directly related to. Bush, Cheney, too.

Haven't we all learned how powerful repetitive association is?

This article has some good points and I think I sent the link to you too late, sorry about that: http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/05/18/gerges.photos/index.html

A few of the points that were compelling to me from Fawaz A. Gerges' article, "Commentary: Why Obama should release photos."

* "In fact, world opinion, particularly that of Muslims, would likely view the release of these horror images as representing a rupture for the better in American politics and foreign policy. America would be seen as reclaiming its high moral compass and affirming its respect for human dignity."

* "The primary target audience is mainstream Muslim public opinion. There is plenty of evidence indicating that Obama's overtures to Muslims have begun to pay off. In polls and my own interviews, more and more Arabs and Muslims say they think very highly of the young president and believe he will have a positive impact on the Middle East and relations between the United States and the region.

The findings of a recent McClatchy/Ipsos poll show a reservoir of good will toward Obama, while negative attitudes towards American foreign policy persist."

* "There is a danger that Obama's new decision to oppose release of the photos could have the opposite of its intended effect by spreading rumors and conspiracy theories about what the photos reveal -- causing more harm than good. In the age of the new media, transparency is a powerful weapon in domestic politics and foreign policy as well."

Plus you and Cyn are very convincing. :)

[Jennifer H]

I agree, without reserve, with the opinions in favor of releasing the photos, for all the reasons stated. People can choose to look or not to look, but I bristle against any kind of concealment of things that were done in my name. I feel like I have a responsibility to look, as disturbing as it may be.

We do have to lead this investigation. One way or another, it will happen, as it should. What we need to be sure of is that we place blame squarely on the shoulders of the people who directed that the torture be carried out. This isn't new policy. Go back at least as far as Vietnam to the Phoenix Program, and you'll know that. Perhaps if our country had gotten a fair and complete look at what happened back then, at the methods we used, and if the officials responsible for directing that program had been held accountable, all the way up through President Johnson (instead of the evidence being destroyed or buried for almost 40 years, not to mention the non-disclosure contracts the troops involved were forced to sign), maybe we wouldn't be having this conversation now.

None of us should be willing to wait 40 years this time to know, fully, what happend(and I don't think we are). The chance to make this as right as we still can is in our hands NOW.

[Lisse]

I'm really torn about this. Not releasing them makes me think that the images may be worse than those already floated out when Bush was still in office.

But I can't see releasing them without the intent to prosecute. I feel that many here would like to see that, but A) I don't think it is going to happen and B) I think even trying to do so would tear the country apart (further).

I also think that there might be something to the "endangering" argument; and not just the troops, but other Americans traveling abroad as well.

[Tracy Clinton]

Respectfully to all those buy into the "endangering the troops" argument including the President, it's a bit of a cop out. We will always have troops overseas and in harm's way. We will always have US nationals traveling abroad where they might cross paths with people somehow connected to the victims in those photos. It's a naive rationale since there will always be people pissed off by these photos, so by the strictures of that logic, the photos can never be released - and that is untenable.

Those photos are evidence not just useful for prosecuting the Eichmann's and their bosses in our civic and military service, but also evidence of what can happen if we flip out as a nation when shocked by crisis and surrender to Daddy Government types. The crimes depicted in those photos are our crime as a nation. How dare we, the accomplices in these crimes, ask to withhold evidence that might prejudice the court of world opinion in their judgment on us. How dare we pretend that if the photos are locked away for a generation that we'll have any chance of being absolved in our lifetimes.

The world will always doubt (and we always doubt ourselves) unless we come clean on our crimes not when it's convenient, but at the earliest possibility.

[Vicki O]

Although releasing the photos will be painful, I think they need to be released. Without the visual evidence, so many people will listen to former-VP Cheney as he justifies the means to the end. Waterboarding has been justified no end, but I suspect many of the photographs will reveal just how meaningless this torture was. Not only do we need to release these photographs for all the world to see, we need to prosecute those people responsible for allowing and/or directing torture. We can not allow torture.....we can't justify it no matter how much intelligence we think we obtain or how many lives we think we save. This nation holds itself to a higher standard and without releasing the photographs, that higher standard will always be in doubt.

[Lawyer Mama]

"Respectfully to all those buy into the "endangering the troops" argument including the President, it's a bit of a cop out. We will always have troops overseas and in harm's way. We will always have US nationals traveling abroad where they might cross paths with people somehow connected to the victims in those photos. It's a naive rationale since there will always be people pissed off by these photos, so by the strictures of that logic, the photos can never be released - and that is untenable."

Ummm... Tracy, with all due respect, try saying that with a husband or child over there serving on the Afghan border. Trust me, stuff like this DOES inflame them. Yes, they're all in danger anyway, but why make it worse? Why make it more dangerous for them to serve? Stick with the morality arguments but don't ever casually dismiss as "a cop out" the concerns of a military family member with a loved one in harm's way.

[Tracy Clinton]

To Lawyer Mama:

But there will always be someone out there in harms way, so that logic rules out EVER releasing the photos, and that's just not acceptable. It just defers the anticipated outrage until your people are home and someone else's people are out there. How is that just?

I understand and appreciate your concern, but that argument still seems a bit of a cop out. By cop out, I intend to mean an argument made more on the raw sentiment or emotion of the now rather than something than will stand the test of time. I regret if I made it seem like I casually fell into thinking this and that I meant to be glib about it. I did not come to this casually, and I am not intending to be glib. I'd like to remind that I'm commenting on the merits of the argument rather than the merits of the person(s) making that argument. That may be small solace to people offended my by remarks, but it's what I have to offer.

[liberal army wife]

When you have someone with Boots in the Sand, you look at this with another perspective. With my husband there AGAIN and my friends' loved ones there, I cannot be "objective" or "detached". I've lived overseas most of my life, as a State Dept brat, and Army Wife. If you have been at the receiving end of a crowd demonstrating against whatever the US has done, you don't forget it. If you have had a police escort to school, or had to review the packages/mail coming to your house, you don't forget it. When you are a target for kidnapping because of what your father does in the name of the United States, you don't forget it. When you have to check under your car every day to make sure there isn't a bomb there, you don't forget it.

We KNOW what was done in our name. If these photos are used during pretrial or trial documentation when we are putting someone on trial - fine. I will publish them on my site myself, if we have Cheney, Rumsfeld et al. in the dock. To release them to satisfy someone's curiosity or to satisfy the rest of the world - not fine.

I'm not sure that the muslim world will react as you hope, that it will somehow cement the President's overtures as being true. Is it worth another life?

LAW