[graywaiter]

This is what I was wondering as well. A troll over at Michell Malkin’s site posted that now there are “reports” of secret rooms where Iraqui women were abused and the pictures show it. I read one post at HufPo that said kids were being sodomized and the pictures show it. Are these people hung up on sex or what? Like the terrorists are going to trust sensitive operational information to women and kids? Please, go project somewhere else.

Who took the damn pictures in the first place? I expect they are of the waterboarding, and agree that they probably aren't as bad as the left hopes.

[BuckeyeTexan]

they probably aren't as bad as the left hopes.

That's a true statement. Catherine Herridge on Fox News says that her contacts tell her that the photos are not as disgusting/repugnant as the Abu Ghraib photos.

So, I think two things happened. First, military officials pushed back hard against the administration to point out the danger to national security and the potential blowback on Obama. Second, the administration reviewed the photos and realized that they weren't as bad as everyone expected and so wouldn't gain them the political traction they had initially hoped for by releasing them.

To be sure, this decision is good for the troops and our national security and that's what counts. But Obama's decision wasn't based on the "greater good" of the nation. He's always focused on his own political capital.