Members of the media were invited to watch videos of torture at Abu Graib. The tapes reportedly show guards grabbing prisoners tongues with pliers and pulling them out of their heads? Cutting off their hands? Beating them to death? You can hear them screaming at the top of their lungs and BEGGING for mercy.

However, virtually ALL of the press members declined the invitation. Why would they decline the invitation you might ask?

It’s because the tapes were of Sadam’s henchmen torturing political prisoners… And if the reporters went and viewed this, they would be required to write some sort of report. This would make the “atrocities” committed by our troops in the prison pale by comparison and therefore make Teddy Kennedy look like an a$$ for saying that the prison was just open under new management and people were still being tortured there.

They couldn’t go see the videos because they don’t want to report something that could bolster the administration’s position that Sadam was evil and that what we’ve done is “nothing” by comparison. Can’t let that get out… Nope…

two wrongs don't make a right?

Was it right to bomb the Japaneese? Or wrong? If I kick you in the nads, will you extend a handshake and forgive me? If we can get information from terrorists, should we interogate them? Or give them flowers?

And John, my point wasn't that two wrongs make a right, my point was that the media didn't cover it! Because it would make what America did look pale by comparison to the "real" atrocities that took place there... The liberal left wing media "ignored" the story "period". That's the point, what are your thoughts about that?

Old news

No it's new news, it happened within the last week. The footage was recently released and it was of Sadam's people torturing political dissidents. The theme may be old, yes there is rampant left wing bias, however, this is illustrative of that FACT.

It's still old news. What members of media attended?

Here you go, from Neals newz

"The worst is how the media completely ignores Saddam Hussein's abuse at the same prison. Let's take a look at the score. A few coalition soldiers, who have been or are being disciplined, took photos of prisoners in humiliating positions. Those prisoners suffered no lasting physical damage. Were the photos and the behavior of those few bad apples wrong? Of course, and the military is dealing with it.

Here is what happened under Saddam's rule at Abu Graib. Decapitations, fingers chopped off one at a time, tongues cut out with a razor blade and prisoners being fed alive to Saddam's Dobermans. We know this took place because there are videos the media is not showing. In fact, the American Enterprise Institute held a little showing on Tuesday. Journalists were invited to come view the videos taken by Saddam's henchmen in the Abu Graib prison as Saddam's torturers actually did their work. Only a very few of our esteemed "journalists" showed up to see the video.

The problem here is if these journalists show up to watch the videos then they will feel some sort of a responsibility to actually report to their viewers or readers what they saw. If they then print stories about Saddam's atrocities it will make the actions of American Reservists at Abu Ghraib look like child's play. This would dampen the constant drumbeat of damnation being heaped on our troops and the Bush administration. In short ... it doesn't fit the template."

Now I ask you, is Abu Graib "old news?" If so, why does the liberal media beat it like a dead horse EVERY SINGLE NIGHT! Night after night after night after night, over and over and over and over again we're told of the horrible abuses we committed on the Iraqis... Yet here's a chance for them to witness Sadam's savagery, and what do they do? The don't RSVP. Why? It would make Bush look justified in his actions and the Libbys certainly don't want to see that... So if Sadam's torture is old news, why isn't Abu Graib old news? Hummmmm? And if it is old news, why do they keep reporting it day after day after day after day, unless they have an agenda? Hummmm?

US torture at Abu Graib is old news.

It is, Ted Kopel did a full show on it just last night. Why would he continue to cover old news? 3 guesses and the first two don't count...

Why do they replay Hitler all the time on TV?

"two wrongs don't make a right?" I take it you're talking about our 'torture' of terrorists and others fighting against our troops?

In utopia you're correct. In reality, no. Getting information out of people in order to SAVE LIVES is right. I'm sorry that some of you don't agree, but that's your opinion and that's fine. If you were in the business of protecting lives and national security you'd understand that sometimes extreme measures ARE required.

Instead of complaining a lot of people should appreciate the fact that many people out there are doing their absolute best in protecting their lives and their rights to complain.

Don't forget that the same people and methods of protecting our lives and ways of life have been operating for an awful long time now. Complaining nothing was done (that could have prevented it) BEFORE something happens and complaining about what IS done to prevent and protect the same things is getting real OLD.

We wouldn't need to sometimes resort to drastic measures if there weren't so many people INCREDIBLY determined to kill us for being nothing more than Americans. And yet to you we're the bad ones...

I never said we were bad.

No, I didn't mean you in particular. The people I'm talking about know who they are.

It was right to bomb the Japanese, it saved possibly as many as 1 million JAPANESE lives. I realize this is obvious, but it looks like once again the obvious must be stated.

ducati996

i know you are refering to hiroshima and nagasaki.

many japanese leaders agree that the loss of those lives, saved possibly the population of japan, who would have fought until they were all dead.

sad but true.

but of what value is interogating people who probably don't even know what they are fighting about, or who their leaders are, or what their leaders have planned.

and please they are worse then us, doesn't cover it.

no one doubts the evil sadam and his two sons did. they are and were two sadistic bastards.

if we wanted to do something, why didn't we have him assasinated instead.

if we couldn't find him, we could have asked isreal intelligence where he was. they seem to be able to hunt down and kill the leaders of the terrorists with minimal collateral damage.

Rick,

I usually know better than to comment on these types of things, but re: your above post....

...Sadam is now out of power. Yet the BS is still thick over there. I fail to see how a simple assassination would have solved the problem. Whether one believes the war in Iraq is justified, managed correctly, etc. it is hard to get away with a simple solution (an assassination) to a problem.

billyjackson

i completely agree with you. i did say if we wanted to do something.

take away the oil and we would have no more interest in sadam's iraq then the myriad of dictators around the world. we put the shaw of iran in power and sheltered him when he absconded with his countries wealth. we have a history of coups to install our "friends" in power as dictators all over the world.

sadam was a threat to his own people. he had shown no interest in enlarging his sphere of influence and posed no threat to anyone outside his borders, not with standing, the administration's BS and his friends and faithful followers on these boards.

it was not our business. it is not our business. and the iraq'a who are temporarily in charge until the next car bomb, want us out.

let's bring home the soldiers (men and women) and take care of our own business like repairing our infrastructer, fixing the physical problems with our schools, correcting the health care in this country, and maybe we might even consider eliminating poverty, and helping our homeless. in case anyone has forgotten, the homeless problem started with reagen emptying mental institutions and dumping people on the streets who could not take care of themselves.

i hope we can aree on at least a few things because i respect your opinion.

rick

Rickamaven,

"he had shown no interest in enlarging his sphere of influence and posed no threat to anyone outside his borders"

That is right... Kuwait is just Southern Iraq...