Some arguments in Abu Ghraib prison photo case must be divulged

[evermind]

New York judge rules some arguments in Abu Ghraib prison photo case must be divulged

By LARRY NEUMEISTER
Associated Press Writer

August 15, 2005, 6:16 PM EDT

NEW YORK -- A judge said he generally ruled in favor of public disclosure when he ordered the government on Monday to reveal some redacted parts of its argument for blocking the release of pictures and videotapes of detainee abuse at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison.

<snip>

He gave U.S. Attorney David Kelley, who argued the case, time to appeal the rulings.

<snip>

He called Myers the most important military official in the country and said, "I need to pay careful attention to what he says."

The judge scheduled arguments on the question of whether the photographs and videos should be released for Aug. 30, saying a speedy decision is important so the public's right to know isn't compromised.

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/newyork/ny-bc-ny--detaineerecords0815aug15,0,6072046.story?coll=ny-region-apnewyork

[Warren DeMontague]

1. The bad news is, they can appeal, so they will. nt

[VegasWolf]

2. We can't afford to show the world how ROTTEN and EVIL we are. nt

[TahitiNut]

3. For another perspective, see

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4356795

[merwin]

4. It's ridiculous to be able to appeal a ruling on an appeal.

That kind of defeats the purpose of the appeal ruling.

[daleo]

5. Are they just delaying for the sake of delay?

Or is this somehow tied to the Iraq constitution process, I wonder? Perhaps it relates to their propaganda buildup against Iran.

[evermind]

7. The administration don't want "delay", they want no release

at all. You could say the judge is delaying, but it's a fair bet that he isn't completely compliant to administration wishes, since he has ruled that arguments they wanted kept secret be made public. A further two weeks isn't much in legal terms. But I get the feeling this case could trundle on quite considerably before a final decision is made about the release.

If you are in full :tinfoilhat: mode, you could theorize that the apparent conflict with the judge is theatre, designed to create the appearance of an independent judiciary and some semblance of public accountability, but I think if "they" had that much control over the judge the case would have been delayed longer, or just quietly resolved in the administration's favour. "They" really, really want this quietly buried.

[Javaman]

9. Think about it...

if these were released now, that fucked up constitution that is being "written" wouldn't be worth the paper it's written on. Why? Because by everyone in the world especially the iraqi's know that it's a sham but more so, everyone knows, ESPECIALLY THE IRAQI'S, that the US is the one actually directing things behind the scenes. Sooooooo, if they see these pictures, they will know everything, once and for all, that we do is total bullshit. And all bets are off. moron* complains that there will be riots in Iraq because of these photos, he would be lucky if it's only riots. I predict an explosion, the likes of which would be like a Tet offensive everyday there.

And on top of that, how will moron* justify to his rabid rightwing base that these horrible photos and video's were the right thing to do. From all indications, even some ultra rw neocons don't want to get the stink of these photos on them.

This would be a melt down for the repukes, period.

[tabasco]

13. The Iraqis already know their puppet government is a sham.

The torture and abuse is no secret to them. It is the American public that is being kept in the dark.

[Orsino]

6. Framing the debate.

It's great that a judge generally favors public disclosure, but isn't it sad and scary that the debate has shifted to whether or not to reveal all the arguments.

We should be forcing the gummint to reveal the images themselves.

[GeorgeGist]

8. Judge Hellerstein

Tear down this wall of phony 'national security'.

[pennylane100]

10. If only the person who turned in the tapes made duplicates.

They could be distributed anonymously on the internet.

[librechik]

12. hmm, yess

but then the question of their authenticity would be so controversial that they would lose much of their power, methinks.

It's better for the American public to see Bush refuse to be open about the facts--people have eyes, and they can see.

I'm really not in a hurry to actually see the material myself. I'm in a hurry to get them into the public discourse. This issue must return to our political reality, and quickly.

[struggle4progress]

11. kick

[understandinglife]

14. Raw Story: BREAKING: JUDGE RULES FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON DETAINEE ABUSE

.... PHOTOS, VIDEOS... THIS AFTERNOON

http://rawstory.com/

Story by Larisa Alexandrovia has now been posted:

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Judge_rules_in_favor_of_holding_public_hearings_on_detainee__0816.html


Peace.

[shanti]

15. is this about the prison pix?

RELEASE THE PIX, *USH!!!

[understandinglife]

17. Yes. - nt

Peace.

[LifeDuringWartime]

16. wow

theyre being released this afternoon? i wonder what stupid story the corporate media will be leading with instead

[converted_democrat]

22. Hold up........

Are you sure that's what it means? I mean I took it to mean that he would be ruling this afternoon, not that it would be released. Don't get me wrong I want it released yesterday, but I don't want to get excited over nothing again. I hope your correct, I really do.

[MADem]

26. NO, of course not

Yesterday the judge heard the arguments, and ruled that there would be a PUBLIC HEARING on why the pics should or should not be released. The USG has 48 hours to appeal, and they likely will win on National Security/Wartime fronts. At the very least, we will not hear those hearings, they will likely be held in camera for those very reasons. Then, if the USG loses again on that score, they will appeal again.

Don't hold your breath, is all I am saying....

[DemoTex]

18. Does that mean they will be released today?

The Rawstory headline is a bit ambiguous.

[InternalDialogue]

21. I believe the current ruling

concerns the government's wish to keep its reasons for classification a secret themselves.

In other words, if the government appeal holds, they don't even have to tell us why they've classified the documents as withheld in the interest of national security.

I think this headline means that the court is going to force the government to publicly reveal their reasons for keeping the pics and vids secret, not the release of the documents themselves (yet).

[moodforaday]

25. Yes, it's only about hearing arguments

from the Raw Story article:

The question argued yesterday is not whether the photographs and tapes are to be made public, but whether the government's arguments against making the documents public are to be made public.

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Judge_rules_in_favor_of_holding_public_hearings_on_detainee__0816.html

[InternalDialogue]

31. Thanks for the link -- they added it within minutes of my post. n/t

:hi:

[Judi Lynn]

19. Hearing is today. n/t

[Oreo]

20. Kick

Let the riots begin

[KyndCulture]

27. kick!

[MADem]

23. We will not be seeing any photos or pictures

The USG will appeal, immediately. The hearing is not scheduled until the 30th, and the judge ruled YESTERDAY, I believe.

This will go to the Supremes, probably. They have a lot of rope with which to hang themselves when they make the National Security/Time of War argument. I expect continued stonewalling, punctuated by the occasional bullshit statement.

[jsamuel]

24. Hearing on substance to be public on THURSDAY

[wishlist]

28. No news and no pics- a rehash of yesterdays non-decision by judge

This article explaining yesterday's development does clarify though that the judge wants the government's arguments against release to be redacted so that the public can understand the judge's eventual decision better. I take that to mean that in case he does go along with the govt's case to not release, he wants the public to know more about exactly what is so bad in the photos and videos that would make the release a bad decision.

[lala_rawraw]

35. Not really and this is why

The news yesterday as delivered by the AP only mentioned the hearing and the ruling, w/o context... such as the misuse of the FOIA sub-paragraph (f) clause. Also, they don't make detailed mention of the declration issued, the arguments presented, or the hearing on Thursday and the one on August 30. So please don't tell me there is no news there. I just took longer than AP to check out the story.

As for photos, no one said photos to be released... not sure where that came from... the ruling was in favor of public hearings, not on release of photos.

More importantly, given that the hearing on the decleration is this Thursday, perhaps you could take the time to ask C-span to cover it.

Finally, nice of the AP to include info on Project Copper Green.

[DemReadingDU]

41. Project Copper Green

There is not much on the internet about this, except for a reference in an article by Seymour Hersh, May 2004


http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040524fa_fact

[jsamuel]

29. Judge is allowing an appeal, but forcing the time they have to do it

down to 48 hours.

"Judge Hellerstein rescheduled the substantive argument to Thursday of this week, which is – per his ruling – to be public. The DOD, however, was given 48 hours to appeal. According to court transcripts, the Thursday public hearing stands even if the DOD appeals, but the portions discussed in any submitted appeal will be held in closed chambers."

[alphafemale]

30. Well...now we know which judge will be the focus of the rw smear machine.

[nashville_brook]

32. get outta.... no way~!

cool -- hope this doesn't get in the way of anyone's vacation! sheesh. that would be terrible.

[nashville_brook]

33. nevermind.

[deadparrot]

34. Watch out for those activist judges.

One step closer, though. I just hope that ultimately, the truth will get out there.

[lala_rawraw]

36. You guys have limited time to ask C-span to cover this...

I suggest you get going because the haring on the Government's abuse of the FOIA clause is tomorrow. The judge ruled to let it be public so that the citizens can see what the government wants to hide (summary in my own words, not exact quote). So can you please keep this kicked and get busy emailing and calling c-span. Thank you.

[cyberpj]

39. Done. And how about if we ask Skinner to make this a DU Activist item

I'll see if I can figure out how ...

On edit:
I sent an email requesting it be posted to DU Activist forum. But I also posted it there just in case.........

[cyberpj]

44. paineinthearse posted this: (but I've started Call Cspan threads anyway)

paineinthearse (1000+ posts) Tue Aug-16-05 04:32 PM
Response to Original message
1. I've never known CSPAN to cover a court hearing....
...but they have been very responsive to covering other events I have suggested. It's worth a phone call or email.

You may consider cross-posting this in the CSPAN group.

[MelissaB]

45. Kick! I called. Come on everybody!

[lala_rawraw]

46. oops, thrusday, not tomorrow... me tired n/t

[Ian David]

47. Done

:kick:

[paineinthearse]

37. ra ra Raw Story!

Larisa Alexandrovna :yourock:

[TroglodyteScholar]

38. Anyone else believe this stinks a bit?

"By and large I think it is fair to characterize that I ruled in favor of public disclosure, not because I was challenging the right and responsibility of the government to assert secrecy but because the arguments that were made were essential for the public understanding of whatever rulings I eventually make," said Hellerstein.

Looks to me like this says they have to disclose the reasons for secrecy so that the public will accept it when a ruling is made in favor of secrecy. In other words, the public will never see the actual evidence, but they've given us the wonderful privilege of knowing exactly why we won't see it.

I thought we already knew why they were holding back: the stuff is vile and outrageous, and could lead to certain individuals being harmed. They want us to think those indivuduals are troops abroad, but I still believe that includes administration officials.

[jsamuel]

40. or so the public can see how bogus their argument is...

especially if their arguement is to protect the people they already blacked out

[The Night Owl]

42. Yes. It stinks. The fix is in.

The torture evidence will never be released. Even worse, the government will not have to defy the courts to keep the torture evidence secret.

So what have we learned?

The FOIA has no teeth.

[cyberpj]

43. CONTACT CSPAN NOW - to cover Open Hearings on Detainee Abuse

I've already emailed Skinner to make this an official DU Activist item but we don't have much time so I thought this might give some of us a head start...

CONTACT CSPAN NOW to request they cover this open hearing!
Main Number: [phone]
Suggest Events:
Submit a public event that you think C-SPAN should cover -
[e-mail]

[Desertrose]

48. Done!