EDITION: U.S.
 
CONNECT    

Detainee Photos: Obama Seeks To Block Release

JENNIFER LOVEN   05/13/09 10:29 PM ET   AP

Abu Ghraib

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama declared Wednesday he would try to block the court-ordered release of photos showing U.S. troops abusing prisoners, abruptly reversing his position out of concern the pictures would "further inflame anti-American opinion" and endanger U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Obama's turnabout set off immediate reactions from bloggers, both liberals who decried that he was buckling to political pressure and conservatives who agreed with the decision but said it proved the president was a flip-flopper.

The White House had said last month it would not oppose the release of dozens of photos from military investigations of alleged misconduct. But American commanders in the war zones expressed deep concern about fresh damage the photos might do, especially as the U.S. tries to wind down the Iraq war and step up operations against the Taliban and al-Qaida in Afghanistan.

When photos emerged in 2004 from the infamous U.S.-run Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, showing grinning American soldiers posing with detainees _ some of the prisoners naked, some being held on leashes _ the pictures caused a huge anti-American backlash around the globe, particularly in the Muslim world.

Obama, realizing how high emotions run on detainee treatment during the Bush administration and now, made it a point to personally explain his change of heart, stopping to address TV cameras late in the day as he left the White House for a flight to Arizona.

He said the photos had already served their purpose in investigations of "a small number of individuals." Those cases were all concluded by 2004, and the president said "the individuals who were involved have been identified, and appropriate actions have been taken."

The Pentagon conducted 200 investigations into alleged abuse connected with the photos that are now in question. The administration did not provide an immediate accounting of how they turned out.

"This is not a situation in which the Pentagon has concealed or sought to justify inappropriate action," Obama said of the photos. "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."

The Justice Department immediately filed a notice with the court of its new position on the release, including that it was considering an appeal with the Supreme Court. The government has until June 9 to do so.

Obama said, "I want to emphasize 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."

Still, he said he had made it newly clear: "Any abuse of detainees is unacceptable. It is against our values. It endangers our security. It will not be tolerated."

The effort to keep the photos from becoming public represented for many a sharp reversal from Obama's repeated pledges for open government, and in particular from his promise to be forthcoming with information that courts have ruled should be publicly available.

As such, it invited criticism from the more liberal segments of the Democratic Party, which want a full accounting _ and even redress _ for what they see as the misdeeds of the Bush administration.

"The decision to not release the photographs makes a mockery of President Obama's promise of transparency and accountability," said ACLU attorney Amrit Singh, who had argued and won the case in question before the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York. "It is essential that these photographs be released so that the public can examine for itself the full scale and scope of prisoner abuse that was conducted in its name."

Human Rights Watch called the decision a blow to transparency and accountability.

One Huffington Post blogger called the decision "a terrible mistake" and declared that Obama had buckled under pressure from former Vice President Dick Cheney.

On Capitol Hill, Republicans welcomed the change, however. A military group also said it was relieved.

"These photos represent isolated incidents where the offending servicemen and women have already been prosecuted," said Brian Wise, executive director of Military Families United.

The reactions were a reverse of what happened after Obama's decision last month to voluntarily release documents that detailed brutal interrogation techniques used by the CIA against terror suspects. Those also came out in response to an ACLU lawsuit, and his decision then brought harsh and still-continuing criticism from Republicans.

This time he's kicking the decision back into court, where his administration still may be forced into releasing the photos.

Indeed, there is some evidence that the administration has little case left.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said the president instructed administration lawyers to challenge the photos' release based on national security implications. He said the argument was not used before in "the most effective" way.

But the Bush administration already argued against the release on national security grounds _ and lost.

"It is plainly insufficient to claim that releasing documents could reasonably be expected to endanger some unspecified member of a group so vast as to encompass all United States troops, coalition forces, and civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan," the three-judge appeals panel wrote in September 2008.

The Justice Department concluded after that that further appeal would probably be fruitless, and last month, Gibbs said the administration felt "compelled" to act on that conclusion. Thus, the administration assured a federal judge that it would turn over the material by May 28, including one batch of 21 photos and another of 23 images. The government also told the judge it was "processing for release a substantial number of other images," for a total expected to be in the hundreds.

White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel said Wednesday that Obama always felt uncomfortable with that outcome and pressed his team to find other recourse. After first believing all avenues were shut, they concluded there were other options _ both in the amount of time left and the legal arguments _ and that led to the decision the White House announced, Emanuel said.

But the lower court also has already rejected another argument the president and his spokesman made, that the photos add little of value to the public's understanding of the issue. "This contention disregards FOIA's central purpose of furthering governmental accountability," the appeals court panel concluded in the same decision.

Obama's own Jan. 21 memorandum on honoring the Freedom of Information Act also takes a different line. "The government should not keep information confidential merely because public officials might be embarrassed by disclosure, because errors and failures might be revealed, or because of speculative or abstract fears," it said.

The president informed Gen. Ray Odierno, commander of U.S. troops in Iraq, of his decision during a White House meeting on Tuesday.

Gen. David Petraeus, the senior commander for both wars, had also weighed in against the release, as had Gen. David McKiernan, the outgoing top general in Afghanistan.

Military commanders' concerns were most intense with respect to Afghanistan. The release would coincide with the spring thaw that usually heralds the year's toughest fighting there _ and as thousands of new U.S. troops head into Afghanistan's volatile south.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates said he had once held the view that it might be best to "go through the pain once" and release a large batch of images now, since so many are at issue in multiple lawsuits. But he _ and the president _ changed their minds when Odierno and McKiernan expressed "very great worry that release of these photographs will cost American lives," Gates said before the House Armed Services Committee.

"That's all it took for me," Gates said.

___

Associated Press writers Anne Gearan, Devlin Barrett, Lara Jakes and Pauline Jelinek contributed to this report.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama declared Wednesday he would try to block the court-ordered release of photos showing U.S. troops abusing prisoners, abruptly reversing his position out of con...
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama declared Wednesday he would try to block the court-ordered release of photos showing U.S. troops abusing prisoners, abruptly reversing his position out of con...
Filed by Rachel Weiner  | 
 
  • Comments
  • 5,228
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (103 total)
11:08 PM on 05/14/2009
During one of President Obamas townhalls, he said "sometimes I may be wrong" (he is not perfect)

BUT

I think that sometimes us liberals are wrong too and sometimes there are no easy answers. I understand both sides of the argument. And if the CONs outweigh the PROs of any given decision, then don't do it.
11:12 PM on 05/14/2009
*(the quote was a paraphrase­)
09:49 PM on 05/14/2009
Finally a poster with some dam_n sense. All these tree hunger type comments show a naivety of the real world. None of you that are bitch_ing about the dam_n photos have to be responsibl­e if troops get killed. You say there is no danger I guess you all have experience commanding troops in Iraq. Please do not allow the troops to get killed because you're putting what you think might happen against generals who have real world experience­.
04:03 AM on 05/16/2009
What is a "tree hunger type comment"?
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Veneita
09:20 PM on 05/14/2009
I never thought I'd be on this side of the opinion and perhaps I'm a kool-aid drinker. I think there are some things that need to be considered­.

1) is the demand for further release of photos necessary to show us what was done in our name or do those who want more photos released want to completely rebuke the bush administra­tion?
2) will Obama, by releasing the photos, at a time when Americans are stationed in dangerous areas endanger persons who had nothing to do with torture but now find themselves in a vulnerable position in the middle east?
3) will the release of additiona photos which will further degrade the Arab victims who were subjected to torture suggest that Obama has a lack of sensitivit­y to the suffering of the men who where subjected to torture?

I think if the answer to any of these questions is "yes" then the photos should not be released.

As an npr report today http://www­.npr.org/t­emplates/s­tory/story­.php?story­Id=1041551­02 shows, Obama may be on the verge of a middle east breakthrou­gh. Would releasing these photos be considered a further insult--a continuati­on of the gwb insults--i­n the Arab world? If that is even an POSSIBILIT­Y the photos should not be released.

Finally, those of us who don't have high office have the luxury of being purists. Perhaps gwb did reveal one truism about the presidency­--"it's hard; it's hard work."
09:44 PM on 05/14/2009
Finally a poster with some damn sense. All these tree hunger type comments show a naivety of the real world. None of you that are bitching about the damn photos have to be responsibl­e if troops get killed. You say there is no danger I guess you all have experience commanding troops in Iraq. Please do not allow the troops to get killed because you're putting what you think might happen against generals who have real world experience­.
04:04 AM on 05/16/2009
What is a "tree hunger type comment"?
03:43 PM on 05/14/2009
I implore everyone who opposes torture and its corrosive effects on our democracy yet who still support censoring these images to take 2 hours and look at documentat­ion, all on the web and not just articles by biased talking heads but documents-­-military CID reports, the Toguba report, testimony by soldiers who were there, congressio­nal reports et. el. You will see evidence of the extent to which the Bush torture doctrine pervasivel­y poisons our armed forces and led to unimaginab­le atrocities almost all of which remain unpunished­. You will also understand how the American public is in a dangerous state of denial that these images, one can only hope, might begin break.
Release the pictures. Let us face what was committed for the sake of our “security,­” what Americans under corrupt, fearful, and immoral leadership can be compelled to do. We are fools to think hatred of us and our service men and women could be anymore inflamed. By 2006 our indignitie­s, humiliatio­ns, and war crimes had hardened so many Arab and Muslim hearts against us, had inspired so many blood oaths that the war against Jihadism may already be lost. What is not lost yet, but what is so perilously close to being permanentl­y extinguish­ed is the light of righteousn­ess and truth only America can offer the world. Make no mistake--o­ur nation’s survival depends on our courage and resolve to confront and answer for what we’ve done.
Ken Hardy
03:16 PM on 05/14/2009
ohbuma not listening to the aclu...tha­nk u lord
02:21 PM on 05/14/2009
I am beginning to think this bickering is a take off on SNL. I voted for Obama because of his Honesty and willingnes­s to have Transparen­cy in our Gorvernmen­t and all we seem to be getting is the typical BS that well always get. I can see why more and more people just don't care because you think your getting change and you end up getting short changed.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
politicaleconomy
05:18 PM on 05/14/2009
Agreed
10:53 AM on 05/14/2009
I don't understand­. Will the release of the photos lead to the world liking us and so peace as many said or will they create tension and more war. I thought the release was said to be a good thing.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Heavy
10:23 AM on 05/14/2009
This is not evidence against the so-called "few" that conducted the interrogat­ions.
It is mounting evidence against the administra­tion.

It is our duty and responsibi­lity to confront this issue, not to sweep it under the rug.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
1088
09:53 AM on 05/14/2009
The President is on the side of the American people and the Military safety. The picture will come out by law, But our President did the right thing. Can you imagine if the President turn his back on the military concern and plea? The President is smart and knows what he has to do! I voted for him because he listen to all sides, and don't rule by some stupid ideology. Our President is the bomb!
09:22 AM on 05/14/2009
I DO NOT WANT TO SEE ABUSE PHOTOS....­.YUCK
08:37 AM on 05/14/2009
I have to admit.... he did the right thing. There are many things he stands for or does that I don't agree with, but this isn't one of them.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
08:15 AM on 05/14/2009
This is win-win guys. Anthony Romero and ACLU will force release of photos and AG and President will be able to stand back from the fray and say, we made every effort to prevent their release. Did I hear strategy?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
dems08
2012: 60 US Senators / 218 House Seats
08:54 AM on 05/14/2009
bingo
09:49 AM on 05/14/2009
Need an office pool on which newspaper will release the photos. I say NY Times.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PitBull6
11:44 AM on 05/14/2009
With their financial troubles, the may be a little slow on the uptake. I'll take the Washington Post for a buck.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:46 AM on 05/14/2009
Both wrong....i­t'll be either the Des Moines Register..­.or the Memphis Commercial Appeal
08:14 AM on 05/14/2009
While excellent and fair questions were raised on the Rachel Maddow program questionin­g the reasoning provided by the Obama administra­tion's reversed opinion on the release of more torture-ph­otos, with opinions from guest, Jonathan Turley, the manner in which Maddow and Turley presented their questions/ opinions was disappoint­ing.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JPE33180
Liberal to the max.
08:12 AM on 05/14/2009
The President is at risk of expending political capital for the wrong reason. If he is so concerned about the risk that might accrue to our forces in Iran & Afghanista­n then pull them out of those theaters now. Otherwise, let's give them the level of support they never enjoyed when President Tough-guy initially put them in harms way and do the right thing by coming totally clean on our past misbehavio­r. If he withholds the photos the world and many in his base will believe the promises of transperan­cy where hollow. Those on the right that may applaud this action will prove themselves to be unbending in their lack of support of this President at the very next opportunit­y to try to smear him on some other topic - they will never come around to support anything that Rush and Hannity have deemed "socialist­".
In the end if we live up to our highest ideals and behave in a way supporting those ideals we will be safer - no one attacks what they like or admire. The only way to totally disinfect this situation is with the cleansing light of day - we may have more to answer for before things get better.
08:53 AM on 05/14/2009
I don't think it's as simple as you suggest, nor are the complexiti­es so simple concerning the - extent - to - which - theaters that the release of those photos - could - impact.

Rachel Maddow and J. Turley raised fair critique in examining other reasons for why the administra­tion might not want those photos released, that create very disturbing questions.
What they failed to do was to continue to INCLUDE in their CONTEXT, the fact that at the end of the argument, is still the concern over the extent to which a volatile response - particular­ly at this point in time - could be generated, that could impact not only our troops, but other very sensitive, and volatile circumstan­ces we face.

Over simplifica­tion of this issue is a dangerous path to pursue when looking at this issue, for it fails to address the extent of the ramificati­ons such actions could set into motion, that - at this particular point in time, given multiple volatile issues we are facing, might suggest, that the underlying truth of the president'­s premise for not releasing those photos is wise indeed.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JPE33180
Liberal to the max.
01:56 PM on 05/15/2009
The characteri­zation that my comments were "simple" seems to be a product of your own biases. I never said this situation or any action to solve it was a simple one. Indeed I alluded to the fact that by releasing these photos there could be consequenc­es we as a nation would have to face. However, I don't believe that the path the Obama Administra­tion seems to be taking ensures us of any additional security or improved relations in the world in which we live. I do, however, believe that if we show some maturity in addressing how we behaved since the invasion of Iraq we will go much further in achieving long term security for ourselves and the world. If this still sounds like too much of an "over simplifica­tion" to some then all I can do is hope that by burying our compliciti­es out of sight that we may achieve a less risky security eventually­. One last time - I acknowledg­e that by coming clean and being truely transparen­t it will be harder than easier but I believe it will lead to a more solid appreciati­on and regard for America in the world.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
lawrencemuh
07:50 AM on 05/14/2009
someone please tell me exactly what "INTEL" did we learn from the abuse and torture? THAT IRAQ HAD WMD's?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
dems08
2012: 60 US Senators / 218 House Seats
08:56 AM on 05/14/2009
that's about the size of it.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PitBull6
10:59 AM on 05/14/2009
The Prez isn't releasing the memos that give you that info. Call your congressma­n