Transparency means transparency when things are hard

[Creideiki]

Not transparency where things are easy.

Do we deserve to know what the government did in our names?

Do we deserve that our transparent government will stop the non-transparent activities of the previous administration?

[Clio the Leo]

1. That's right! I want his daily national security briefings streamed live darn it!

Obviously I'm being snarky, but is there ANY point where we draw the line? That's a serious question.

[blm]

4. Bin Laden Determined to Strike

Listen.....how did it work out for this nation when BCCI matters went unresolved throughout the 90s because of the 'national security' excuse? We ended up with BushInc continuing its fascist agenda that also armed and funded the growing global terrorist networks, Bush2 returning to full power of the WH, a 9-11 event, and this Iraq war.

That's all that can happen when open government and accountability take a back seat to PROTECTING BushInc.

[Clio the Leo]

35. But again, where do you draw the line?

You want his national security briefing files posted on the White House website?

That's not hyperbole, it's a serious question.

[Hippo_Tron]

32. Yup, we should be allowed to reuquest the nuclear codes under FOIA

:eyes:

[Clio the Leo]

34. Yep, and when is it my turn to carry the football!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Football

[Bluerthanblue]

2. if there was NEW information in the photos- you'd have some

kind of point.

Pres. Obama released the memos- THOSE are the important documents that show the criminal activities which were sanctioned/encouraged by the last administration.

The pictures are photos of the fruit of the memos- Obama didn't order them destroyed or forever silenced did he?

Have we just become addicted to outrage?

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[high density]

8. Addicted to outrage

I think people were so conditioned to giving Bush no leeway (for good reason) that they feel Obama must be treated in the same way. I trust Obama's judgment infinitely more than I do Bush's, so I am willing to give him much more leeway and time. While I am upset about our country's torture under the former administration, it is not a hot button issue that keeps me awake at night. I do not understand why some people are so outraged over the decision on the photos. Obama was listening to the generals, which is a nice change from Bush.

[Creideiki]

11. I'm not asking for some stupid pony

This is a strictly moral issue. I'm truly saddened that some Americans are willing to check their morals at the door.

[high density]

16. Our morals say we must release photos?

What? Our morals say we shouldn't be doing the torture to begin with. There's no cover up going on. We know what happened because it's in the memos that Obama released.

[Luminous Animal]

14. You have no idea what the photos depict

because the Obama admin won't let you see them.

[mikelgb]

19. lol that is exactly what Bush and condi said about the PDB referenced above

no NEW information

an historical document

[polichick]

26. The new information is that there are many more pics from many more sites...

...which proves that it wasn't "a few bad apples" who have been punished ~ but something systemic and coming from the top.

[Smarmie Doofus]

5. Exactly. nt

[leftofthedial]

6. The promise of "transparency" is just one more Obama lie;

that is, unless he meant that his lies would be transparent.

[polichick]

27. Turley said last night that this admin. is the biggest bait and switch...

...deal in history, and that Obama has morphed into his predecessor.

I'm still hopeful, but sometimes I find myself entertaining the idea that Obama is the ultimate magician ~ using the "shiny object" of his own charisma to distract from some very ugly truths about his priorities.

[scheming daemons]

9. Tell that to the serviceman or woman in Iraq....

Transparency is NOT worth more than people's lives.

[Creideiki]

10. There are two issues there

First, what the hell are we still doing in Iraq? Oh, yeah, we had to oust Saddam Hussein because HE TORTURED HIS PEOPLE!!!!!!111!OMG!

Second, well, let me say that again. What the hell are we still doing in Iraq?

Okay, I think I'm past that.

Third, photos don't endanger servicemembers. Photos of servicemembers torturing prisoners endanger servicemembers. But they wouldn't exist if a) the torture didn't happen, b) some fool with a camera wasn't standing by to snap a memento, and c) the torture didn't happen.

I find myself repeating myself a lot. Let me explain. Most people need to have something repeated three times to saturate the skull.

So let me say this one more time. That we tortured prisoners is a national shame and a crime. Release the photos. Prosecute the torturers. Prosecute those who knew the torture was going on.

And, no, I don't care if that little guilt-trail leads right up to Nancy Freaking Pelosi's door. I would hope it doesn't. But if it does, then she's complicit.

Torture is wrong whether it's performed by a Republican, a Democrat, a Libertarian, or a Progressive. (Note: "Progressive" and "Democrat" are not completely mutually exclusive, but neither is one sufficient for the other.)

[scheming daemons]

13. And the 99% of servicemen and women that DIDN'T torture....

... they're expendable to you, apparently.


in the name of "transparency".

[blm]

15. Iraqi insurgency against occupation will not go easier on troops when they see Obama protecting Bush

or maintaining his policies.

[berni_mccoy]

18. No, they are expendable to that person for IMMEDIATE transparency... the Obama administration

will release the photos when it is approrpriate to release them. Not when it means undue risk to the soldiers.

[nichomachus]

21. The, basically, you are defending the Bush administration and everything they did

for eight years -- because they claimed that everything was to "protect the troops."

You may be on the wrong board.

[krawhitham]

28. No Bushco destroyed the 1st round of photos

These photo will be released when the troops are out of harms way

A time and place for everything. Obama wanted to release the photos then the leaders on the ground told him it could harm our troops. You have to listen to the leaders on the ground, if you do not the troops will have no faith in the commander in chief. If one person dies because of the photos being released the GOP will run with it forever claiming it as proof Obama makes us less safe

[nichomachus]

20. Please stop this stupid meme

By saying that the pictures are so horrible they can't be seen, you have already pissed off the other people. They are imagining the most horrible despicable things. That is what is endangering the troops.

It I were a terrorist recruiter, I would be sending flowers to Obama, because he just made my job easier. I could make up the most horrendous crap and cite Obama as a source.

[scheming daemons]

25. No.... actual pictures are more powerful....

The recruitment posters work much better when there's an actual picture on them and not some rant about what MIGHT have occurred.

[bluedawg12]

30. Are those the only options- show the pictures or don't show them? n/t

[masuki bance]

38. Yes.

[bluedawg12]

39. Not really. The President can call for an investigation.

In the course of the investigation the pictures may then be used as evidence.

That's coupled with context and accountability, it's still transparency and it shows the world that business as it has been conducted since 2002 is over.

[masuki bance]

41. That option is show the pictures.

[Two Americas]

36. false

"Our enemies" know what happened. How anyone could imagine otherwise is beyond me. It is the American people that need to know.

Reconciliation starts with honesty. Lying and covering up and denial is what increases hostilities and places our service people at greater risk.

"We can't tell you what we did to you because that might make you angry and you might retaliate?"

Ridiculous.


...

[Hell Hath No Fury]

46. Did you have a problem with the relase of...

the Abu Ghraib pictures under Bush? Were you damning the press for releasing them, for fear of endangering our soldiers lives???

Somehow I don't think so. :eyes:

[mscuedawg]

12. We've lived more years of being ignorant to what our Govt is responsible for than not...

I know I dont want to know HALF what our Gov't has been responsible for over the years...especially with a fear monger like Cheney at the helm... I cant imagine those who are serving overseas want that out. Such propaganda would totally change the face of the situation for our troops...and after a soldier with PTSD just killed five of our own...they DONT need that.

Its reckless and foolish to think transparency should over-ride responsibility...

[berni_mccoy]

17. How "hard" is transparency if it means people will die? That's what you are asking for.

[nichomachus]

22. Karl Rove could not have said that better

Oh wait a minute, he did -- for eight years. Call Fox News. I think they may have a job for you.

[berni_mccoy]

24. You can call me anything you want. But it won't change the fact that releasing the photos will do

will bring unecessary harm to the soldiers.

Believing in transparency is one thing.

Holding transparency up above the lives of soldiers who did not torture is another. There is a responsibility of the President to the soldiers who are in a war zone.

There will be a time and a place for the release of the photos. But now is not that time.

[bluedawg12]

29. The pictures are already well known - so the anger is there now. n/t

[dbmk]

42. I dont see streets full of people screaming

Screaming for the deaths to all americans and basically anyone from the so called "western civilisation".
Burning flags and embassies. Fringe elements easily recruiting and inciting riots among less radical elements.

Thats what is VERY likely to happen all over the Middle East if horrendous pictures of Middle Eastern looking persons being tortured are released.
They are a wonderful propaganda tool.

I am a Dane, and I have my doubts that the Embassy in Syria would have been burned if someone had _written_ anything to the same effects as the infamous Mohammed drawings.

It certainly would serve a righteous purpose as far as proceedings in internal US investigations/opinions goes.
But the consequence in some parts of the world would not be in line with the intended purpose. Possibly quite the opposite. You will find little distinction between administrations and their intent there. Soldiers would not be the only ones in danger.

[snowdays]

40. Cheney is so proud of you--and Hannity, and Joe, and. and ....

[Cha]

45. It's a stupid argrument so it has

to resort in name calling.

Fucking karl rove has a different reason for not showing the pictures..President Obama has others.

And, they're too dense to know the difference, willfully or otherwise.

[mikelgb]

23. flip that around what if Obama stonewalling justice inflames some individuals to kill

what then?


people are going to get killed because they are in a warzone and there are far more heinous things than photos being released going on that inflame way more hatred to us

this is a poorly reasoned excuse to not follow a court order

[dbmk]

43. The Danish embassy in Syria was torched over _drawings_ in a paper

Last I checked that was not a warzone.

Edit: Let me be clear: I can certainly see the reason for demanding the pictures be released.
As long as one is aware of and admits to the very possible consequences.

There is an argument to made that it is the necessary consequence for the US to be the country you would like it to be. But are you sure any bad consequences from this will not counteract that wish?

[ShortnFiery]

31. Amen. It will be the impetus to REPLACE the torturers who still fill the ranks of our DEFENSE ...

DEPARTMENT.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8407833

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

This week is our second quarter 2009 fund drive.
Donate and you'll be automatically entered into our daily contest.
New prizes daily!



No purchase or donation necessary. Void where prohibited. Click here for more information.

[stillcool]

37. Transparency...

there is no way the Pentagon/Intelligence/Military apparatus will ever be transparent. There is a reason why black ops have no oversight from Congress...Congress doesn't want to know. There's a whole host of decades of crimes filed under "National Security" and "Classified Information". You think any of that will ever see the light of day? Well..maybe after this nation destructs.

[SeaLyons]

44. This nightmare will never end without prosecution of all the

wrongdoers. Whether or not the pictures are made public is not the issue. Our government TORTURED, and it must be prosecuted. That is all.

I can't stand watching this unfolding on MSM, with the repukes putting the dems on the defensive for their dirty deeds. It's just bullshit.