US Soldiers Trade Iraqi Dead Photos for Porn (This can't be true, can it?)

Gemini Cricket · 09-28-2005, 09:02 AM

US Soldiers Allegedly Trading Iraqi Dead Pictures for Porn

I was thinking that this was weird, possibly extreme blog weirdness.

But...

The AP Covered it

and then...

The NY Times Covered It.

Quote:

The Army is investigating complaints that soldiers posted photographs of Iraqi corpses on an Internet site in exchange for access to pornographic images on the site, officials said Tuesday.

sleepyjeff · 09-28-2005, 09:33 AM

Just goes to show that if you dig hard enough you are bound to find some kind of disgusting behavior among a population of 100,000+.

What is truly disgusting is the reporting of this story.....it can't possibly help the troops on the ground in harms way---so much for the left* saying they "really support he troops but not the war".

*left media, not you gd...I know you're a good guy

Ghoulish Delight · 09-28-2005, 10:14 AM

Yeah, damned freedom of the press. Those bastards should really just keep their mouth shut.

innerSpaceman · 09-28-2005, 11:29 AM

sleepyjeff, we do not live (yet) in a police state. Propaganda is the job of the government, but not the press. Their job is to report matters of import and interest, no matter the consequences.

It doesn't matter if it's two grunts or two hundred, it's a story. And how it affects troop morale is not a matter for the press to be concerned with.

Widespread, systemic prisoner abuse can't be good for morale either. Should those stories be squelched? How 'bout the story of how the army is going after the people who've blown the whistle on systemic prisoner abuse, but not the abusers themselves? Bad for morale, huh?

Gemini Cricket · 09-28-2005, 02:43 PM

CNN and Wolf Blitzer just discussed this issue on TV. They also talked about the blogs that this story was appearing on. This is awesome. People need to know about all this.

sleepyjeff · 09-28-2005, 07:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

sleepyjeff, we do not live (yet) in a police state. Propaganda is the job of the government, but not the press. Their job is to report matters of import and interest, no matter the consequences.

It doesn't matter if it's two grunts or two hundred, it's a story. And how it affects troop morale is not a matter for the press to be concerned with.

Widespread, systemic prisoner abuse can't be good for morale either. Should those stories be squelched? How 'bout the story of how the army is going after the people who've blown the whistle on systemic prisoner abuse, but not the abusers themselves? Bad for morale, huh?

Never said that the press should be banned or barred from reporting this....said it was disgusting that they did. There are lots of stories out there that are not reported that are of much more "import and interest" then this. This is clearly just another attempt to make the American Military look evil......which will imho indirectly cause the deaths of our men and women

sleepyjeff · 09-28-2005, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gemini Cricket

CNN and Wolf Blitzer just discussed this issue on TV. They also talked about the blogs that this story was appearing on. This is awesome. People need to know about all this.

Why is it awesome?

Why do people need to know about this?

In the end, what exactly are you hoping this story will accomplish?

wendybeth · 09-28-2005, 07:38 PM

Jeff, you're shooting the messenger here. The story exists because certain people feel like they can do this sort of **** and get away with it. They are enraging others and endangering lives, not to mention behaving in a disgusting and (I believe) very un-American way. We're better than that- aren't we?

Motorboat Cruiser · 09-28-2005, 07:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sleepyjeff

This is clearly just another attempt to make the American Military look evil......which will imho indirectly cause the deaths of our men and women

In my opinion, the actions are what damages the military image, not the reporting of them. No improper actions, no story. If a certain segment of the military doesn't want to be perceived in the way they are, they need to clean up their act. They can't be taking pictures of their prisoners on leashes, naked, and stacked up to the ceiling... or dead and trading them for porn.

You are shooting the messenger.

Prudence · 09-28-2005, 07:50 PM

Prudence has an opinion!

I'll wait for you to get over your shock and surprise.

If the photos are on the internet, they will eventually be found by someone outside those participating in the posting. The internet is not a particularly good place to hide things. Whether found by our government, insurgent groups, AI, the press, or any other group, they will be found and it will look bad.

Why will it look bad? Because it's awfully hard to take the moral high ground when your actions aren't so moral. We already went through a whole hoo-haw over prisoner photos. I'll conceed that war is an experience that cannot be understood by those who aren't there. However, there is a significant distinction between taking a "war trophy" photo and posting that photo on the internet, just as there is a distinction treatment of live humans who pose a continuing threat or possess valuable information and treatment of an inanimate corpse. (This portion of the opinion was first run by my husband to make sure I didn't have a wholly unrealistic view of the military.) Not only that, but I believe there was a photo on the blog page of a woman injured in an attack (not an insurgent.) I may be wrong, as I didn't linger. If so, I don't even have words to describe that.

Now back the the "eventually found" portion of this argument: Best case scenario is that the military finds it first and shuts it down. Worst case scenario is that the enemy finds it first and immediately starts the propaganda against us. Middle ground is that another party finds it first, the government acts appropriately shocked, and involved parties are punished.

I agree that the existence of these photos puts our troops in danger. However, because I feel that the photos would have been eventually found by someone, whether or not press, I feel that the irresponsiblity lies with the participants for creating a situation that opens troops up to increased risk. The soldiers involved created the product and placed it on the 'net. Not only that, but they did this AFTER the Abu Whatsis prison episode. Have they no sense whatsoever? And do they regularly display this lack of sense in carrying out their assigned duties upon which the lives of others depend?

09-28-2005, 09:33 AM	#2
sleepyjeff Go Hawks Go! Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Parkrose Posts: 2,632	Just goes to show that if you dig hard enough you are bound to find some kind of disgusting behavior among a population of 100,000+. What is truly disgusting is the reporting of this story.....it can't possibly help the troops on the ground in harms way---so much for the left* saying they "really support he troops but not the war". left media, not you gd...I know you're a good guy __________________ River Guardian-less*
	Submit to Quotes

09-28-2005, 10:14 AM	#3
Ghoulish Delight I Floop the Pig Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Alternative Swankstyle Posts: 19,348	Yeah, damned freedom of the press. Those bastards should really just keep their mouth shut. __________________ 'He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.' -TJ
	Submit to Quotes

09-28-2005, 11:29 AM	#4
innerSpaceman Kink of Swank Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Inner Space Posts: 13,075	sleepyjeff, we do not live (yet) in a police state. Propaganda is the job of the government, but not the press. Their job is to report matters of import and interest, no matter the consequences. It doesn't matter if it's two grunts or two hundred, it's a story. And how it affects troop morale is not a matter for the press to be concerned with. Widespread, systemic prisoner abuse can't be good for morale either. Should those stories be squelched? How 'bout the story of how the army is going after the people who've blown the whistle on systemic prisoner abuse, but not the abusers themselves? Bad for morale, huh?
	Submit to Quotes

09-28-2005, 02:43 PM	#5
Gemini Cricket ... Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 13,244	CNN and Wolf Blitzer just discussed this issue on TV. They also talked about the blogs that this story was appearing on. This is awesome. People need to know about all this.
	Submit to Quotes

09-28-2005, 07:38 PM	#8
wendybeth Nevermind Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,847	Jeff, you're shooting the messenger here. The story exists because certain people feel like they can do this sort of **** and get away with it. They are enraging others and endangering lives, not to mention behaving in a disgusting and (I believe) very un-American way. We're better than that- aren't we? __________________
	Submit to Quotes

09-28-2005, 07:50 PM	#10
Prudence Beelzeboobs, Esq. Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Gavel - I haz it Posts: 6,287	Prudence has an opinion! I'll wait for you to get over your shock and surprise. If the photos are on the internet, they will eventually be found by someone outside those participating in the posting. The internet is not a particularly good place to hide things. Whether found by our government, insurgent groups, AI, the press, or any other group, they will be found and it will look bad. Why will it look bad? Because it's awfully hard to take the moral high ground when your actions aren't so moral. We already went through a whole hoo-haw over prisoner photos. I'll conceed that war is an experience that cannot be understood by those who aren't there. However, there is a significant distinction between taking a "war trophy" photo and posting that photo on the internet, just as there is a distinction treatment of live humans who pose a continuing threat or possess valuable information and treatment of an inanimate corpse. (This portion of the opinion was first run by my husband to make sure I didn't have a wholly unrealistic view of the military.) Not only that, but I believe there was a photo on the blog page of a woman injured in an attack (not an insurgent.) I may be wrong, as I didn't linger. If so, I don't even have words to describe that. Now back the the "eventually found" portion of this argument: Best case scenario is that the military finds it first and shuts it down. Worst case scenario is that the enemy finds it first and immediately starts the propaganda against us. Middle ground is that another party finds it first, the government acts appropriately shocked, and involved parties are punished. I agree that the existence of these photos puts our troops in danger. However, because I feel that the photos would have been eventually found by someone, whether or not press, I feel that the irresponsiblity lies with the participants for creating a situation that opens troops up to increased risk. The soldiers involved created the product and placed it on the 'net. Not only that, but they did this AFTER the Abu Whatsis prison episode. Have they no sense whatsoever? And do they regularly display this lack of sense in carrying out their assigned duties upon which the lives of others depend? __________________ traguna macoities tracorum satis de
	Submit to Quotes