Posted on 05/29/2009 1:23:15 PM PDT by Starman417
abused in Afghanistan and Iraq, in the name of transparency. The ACLU felt this would be proof that the abuses that happened at abu Ghraib was not "aberrational" (what is not considered an aberration? 1 in 100,000? 1 in 10,000? 1 in 10? 100 allegations per year?).
Obama said, "I want to emphasise that these photos that were requested in this case are not particularly sensational, especially when compared to the painful images that we remember from Abu Ghraib." He also later said the small number of perpetrators were charged and tried in 2004.According to Thomas Ricks, General Odierno had a direct influence on President Obama's reversal.The administration then abruptly changed course, saying it would not release the photographs. The White House spokesman, Robert Gibbs, explained, "The president believes that the specific case surrounding the damage that would be done to our troops and our national security has not fully been developed and put in front of the court."
When photos from abu Ghraib went public (during a time of war)....did that sort of transparency help our efforts in securing a more stable and peaceful Iraq? Did it cost the lives of U.S. and Coalition soldiers? Undoubtedly, it did.
(Excerpt) Read more at Flopping Aces ...
That’s Obama, a day late and a dollar short again.
With the damage near all the way done, He’ll reverse his position and try to spin his reversal into a ‘support for the troops’ position.
What a peice of work this guy is.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.