Posted on 09/29/2005 11:08:15 AM PDT by Ben Mugged
NEW YORK - Pictures of detainee abuse at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison must be released despite government claims that they could damage America's image, a judge ruled Thursday.
U.S. District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein ordered the release of certain pictures, saying terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan have proven they "do not need pretexts for their barbarism."
The American Civil Liberties Union sought the release of 87 photographs and four videotapes as part of an October 2003 lawsuit demanding information on the treatment of detainees in U.S. custody and the transfer of prisoners to countries known to use torture. The ACLU contends that prisoner abuse is systemic.
(Excerpt) Read more at lodinews.com ...
This is really shocking. If you didn't know better, you'd think the judiciary was in cahoots with democrats to see how much crap they can throw up at the wall.
Does the POTUS have the authority to block the release of these photos on national security grounds ?
I'm even more surprised now that I see Hellerstein is a Clinton appointee. Who would think a Clinton appointee would rule in favor of the ACLU?
This judge better have plenty of soap and water to wash the blood off his hands. Maybe Michael Issakoff will loan him some.
Can this ruling be appealed to the USSC?
All rulings can be appealed to the USSC. ;^)
Yes. But the administration would do better to appeal to the Federal Appeals Court in Washington. That will tie this up for several more months. If the Appeals Court kicks this opinion to the curb, then the ACLU will have to take it to the Supremes, which means there will be no decision until at least the summer of 2007.
Do it Rummy, you have the fortitude!
"If damaging our "image" is all the government had to offer, then the pictures should be released."
I agree with that. Censoring pictures of actions because they could damage a countries image is like banning guns because people use them to commit murder. It's not the pictures that are the problem.
Yield to the Bill of Rights bureaucratic slime.
This is a Separation of Powers issue. Bush should simply ignore the ruling. Judge Hellerstein has made his decision; now let him try to enforce it.
The terrorists are going to try to kill our troops either way.
"Can this ruling be appealed "
Not at all certain. This is what is called an interlocutory order in a discovery dispute. Normally they are not appealable. There are exceptions. The next fight will be not over whether the judge was right or wrong but over whether the order itself is appealable.
Okay. So we can ignore judges orders now? If I am ordered to pay child support by a judge, can I just ignore it?
It is all about giving aid and comfort to the enemy in time of war. Why should we enable the enemy to use these pictures in their propaganda effort against us? We can release them after our troops leave Iraq. Would we do something similar during WWII?
Well, if you were empowered by the Constitution of the United States to "Breed without Financial Obligation", then yes, you should ignore the ruling.
But you aren't. So you shouldn't.
Sadly too many people do this.
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.