Obama to block release of detainee abuse photos

[The Minsky Moment]

I can see Obama's rationale. If the photos are as terrible as they sound (and it seems like, to block them, they have to be worse than Abu Graib) how could he avoid prosecuting people for this?

So the rationale is - the photos are so bad they show evidence of a crime, and therefore revealing them will force the executive branch to fulfill its responsiblity to enforce the law, a responsibility that it can evade if the photos are kept under wraps.

sorry, that just makes it worse.

[Faeelin]

I can see Obama's rationale. If the photos are as terrible as they sound (and it seems like, to block them, they have to be worse than Abu Graib) how could he avoid prosecuting people for this?

So the rationale is - the photos are so bad they show evidence of a crime, and therefore revealing them will force the executive branch to fulfill its responsiblity to enforce the law, a responsibility that it can evade if the photos are kept under wraps.

sorry, that just makes it worse.

Hrmm. So what do you see as the consequences of releasing the photos?

[garbon]

Obama's OTOH position is inexcusable - he (correctly) made Bush's disgraceful evisceration of FOIA -- a federal law he was bound by oath to uphold and enforce - a major issue in his campaign.  It just goes to show Lord Acton is always right.  However sane a person appears to be going into the White House, they can't seem to control themselves from being taken over by the seductions of the imperial (and imperious) presidency.

There's hope for him yet then. Just need to get Pelosi disgraced.

[KRonn]

I can see Obama's rationale. If the photos are as terrible as they sound (and it seems like, to block them, they have to be worse than Abu Graib) how could he avoid prosecuting people for this?

So the rationale is - the photos are so bad they show evidence of a crime, and therefore revealing them will force the executive branch to fulfill its responsiblity to enforce the law, a responsibility that it can evade if the photos are kept under wraps.

sorry, that just makes it worse.

I heard/read on the news that the photos aren't as damaging as Abu Ghraib. My understanding is that these photos were used as part of evidence to prosecute people committing the crimes, so the law is being enforced, I'd say. Just as laws for similar crimes not against Muslim/Arab prisoners are enforced, except this gets a lot more attention, for what ever reasons. I'm sure the info, minus pics, is out there on the criminal proceedings, or if not it can be made available through the Freedom of Information Act. We'll see how the courts decide on this, again.

Also, Pres Obama is soon to make a trip and speeches to people of the Mid East. So I'm sure he'd like to keep these out of public, for now especially. Not an excuse to release or not, just a note that since Pres Obama is trying to make overtures to the Mid East, this hurts his efforts.

[Valmy]

The gov't didn't take the pictures, the perps did.

Military security allows people to take personal snapshots of interrogations of prisoners?  WTF?

[The Brain]

The gov't didn't take the pictures, the perps did.

Military security allows people to take personal snapshots of interrogations of prisoners?  WTF?

Yeah America must suck ass something fierce. I can't take a camera to work and I don't work with anything nearly as sensitive as torture.

[Berkut]

I can see Obama's rationale. If the photos are as terrible as they sound (and it seems like, to block them, they have to be worse than Abu Graib) how could he avoid prosecuting people for this?

Actually the opposite is true - the photos are not that bad, and they have been used to prosecute, so there is no real good reason to release them, other than to provide fodder for the "OMG TEH US IS EVIL!" crowd.

the rational is that if the photos are released, more people will die as a result. There is no compelling reason to release them, so why do so?

[garbon]

the rational is that if the photos are released, more people will die as a result. There is no compelling reason to release them, so why do so?

"Democracy requires accountability, and accountability requires transparency."

[Berkut]

the rational is that if the photos are released, more people will die as a result. There is no compelling reason to release them, so why do so?

"Democracy requires accountability, and accountability requires transparency."

Is there some level of accountability that cannot be met without the release of these photos?

Does that demand outweigh the findings of the relevant authorities that releasing the photos will damage Americas ability to look after her interests and safeguard the lives of American citizens and soldiers around the world?

Perhaps they do - but I have seen no argument even put forth that that is the case, while the Administration, which is not exactly well known as one that makes habit of hiding this kind of stuff, has argued the opposite. Until someone gives me a good reason to reject that conclusion, it seems eminently reasonable to me.

There is all kinds of documents that are kept classified all the time. How is this any different?

[Faeelin]

I can see Obama's rationale. If the photos are as terrible as they sound (and it seems like, to block them, they have to be worse than Abu Graib) how could he avoid prosecuting people for this?

Actually the opposite is true - the photos are not that bad, and they have been used to prosecute, so there is no real good reason to release them, other than to provide fodder for the "OMG TEH US IS EVIL!" crowd.

the rational is that if the photos are released, more people will die as a result. There is no compelling reason to release them, so why do so?

Hmm. This is a good point.

[The Brain]

the rational is that if the photos are released, more people will die as a result. There is no compelling reason to release them, so why do so?

You don't think that the AG photos are getting old?

[The Minsky Moment]

Hrmm. So what do you see as the consequences of releasing the photos?

Don't know but whatever they are, they don't qualify as FOIA exceptions.

[Berkut]

Hrmm. So what do you see as the consequences of releasing the photos?

Don't know but whatever they are, they don't qualify as FOIA exceptions.

Apparently Obama does not agree with you. I imagine he is citing Exemption #1, in fact - possibly 7 as well.

[The Minsky Moment]

Actually the opposite is true - the photos are not that bad, and they have been used to prosecute, so there is no real good reason to release them, other than to provide fodder for the "OMG TEH US IS EVIL!" crowd.

the rational is that if the photos are released, more people will die as a result. There is no compelling reason to release them, so why do so?

Because the presumption that applies is exactly the opposite - everything the government does and every document the government hold is presumptively available to the public unless there is a compelling reason to withhold it.  That's what it means to be a government for the people, of the people, by the people.  The people don't have to explain or justify why they want to see things their government is doing; the government has to justify why they won't tell.

There is all kinds of documents that are kept classified all the time. How is this any different?

Documents may be kept classified because they contain secret technical specs, or reveal secret intelligence info, or confidential strategic information, etc.  This doesn't fall into that category - it's just embarassing to the government because it makes it look bad.  That's not a justification for keeping the info classified.

There are a bunch of exceptions for FOIA.  The last administration argued that in court.  They lost three times.  Now Obama is going for loss #4.

[The Minsky Moment]

Apparently Obama does not agree with you. I imagine he is citing Exemption #1, in fact - possibly 7 as well.

They are relying on exemption 7.  All four judges that have considered the issue have found against the government.  The entire Second Circuit court of appeals rejected the en banc appeal.

Of course, it is the government's right to appeal to the Supreme Court if they honestly think the lower courts have it wrong.  But it doesn't appear to me that Obama really thinks the 2nd circuit got the law wrong - giving him the full benefit of the doubt, the best that can be said is that he disagrees on policy grounds.