this is not a democracy as we were taught and learned to understand in my educational preparatory schools.teachers step forward now and tell us how you are teaching this today.

this is world war principles and practices as we know in a fascist government,right? which by the way may have been us instead of them?

as long as these stories begin to unfold again and again till someone gets it we will continue to muck rack these events until justice is served.no one is above american law; so the government will just change law to benefit the situation with transparency of course? thanks glenn...

should we face the facts that democracy has been the illusion served with unequal parts of fascisim,imperialism, and CAPITALISM with emphasis on eco comics with liberty and justice for all?

if so why and if not what next?

what has been on my mind is why we have a constitution when it seems all it does is create a problems for the government officials? however great it is for the people... i really hope the constitution will live as is forever. it is a beautiful work crafted of great minds with a humane interest,love,fear of God, and conscience.save the constitution act by the people for the people now.

what next is an illusion, is it not?

are we a nation of selfish children where our father and his advisors is dictating our every move? yep, yep, yep.seems like it, yep, yep, yep, seems like it.don't cha know.

Keep up the good reporting

Obama has been very disappointing when it comes to transparency and the freedom of information, which of course means accountability is impossible, and if we are to put this honestly, more than anything I believe our military fears the world finding out how we're fighting these wars in civilian areas, not just the Afghan public.

I grew up watching Vietnam movies and thankful of the firm wisdom I'd learned that it was wrong, not just what we did, but the way we did it, everyone in the world under 50 saw those movies, everyone older than that lived through it, yet here we are again bombing and killing innocent life because we're either too cheap or too lacking in nobility to fight with honor and do due diligence before releasing impartial and indiscriminant weapons of destruction (not "mass destruction" per se, but from the innocents who are dying and their families and loved ones, definitely "massive" destruction).

Even if we grant that the release of photos will make iraqis attack the troops, that's not a legal reason not to release the photos. When I looked at the sentence I wrote above there was way too many uses of their and them. Sorry

I think the reason its irrelevant is that its inconsequential to the legality of suppressing the photos. Meaning, even if we grant that their release would make them attack the troops, that isn't a legal reason not to release them. The fact that we kill civilians in airstrikes and try to make that argument is just ironic.

Yes. I'm always happy to have a discussion with someone who is intellectually honest (as I always try to be myself). One of the reasons I love your blog is that it's clear you are intellectually honest, and that you don't equivocate to make your points (which is why I was concerned about clarifying that you weren't doing that here). If any arena of discourse is in need of that kind of intellectual honesty, it's the political. I also appreciate your willingness to defend and clarify your positions in the comments thread. Thanks.

Thanks for the note and the link. Between Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, Bagram, and wherever else I may have read about, not to mention the disparate groups of which you wrote....distintions are sometimes difficult to keep in check. Good stuff.... And the point you (as well as Glenn) made about the irrelevance anyway, ie. civilian deaths being a more disturbing source of Anti-American hatred well-made.

For all its seeming insignificance (compared to, oh, say, torture and other war crimes), the resistance to disclosure of the visitor logs is pretty G-D telling. Seriously: this is the battle the administration wants to pick?

I'll be interested to hear the arguments trucked out to justify that determination. And I'm also impressed that the White House is apparently "reviewing" the question (while prudently observing a black-out secrecy in the interim) rather than declaring itself as coming down firmly one way or t'other. Wonder how long that review might take? And on what date those of us actually PAYING FOR THAT WHITE HOUSE might be considered able to legitimately question our right to know who is actually coming and going from that house THAT BELONGS TO US.

Thanks - I wish all disputes of this kind were able to be discussed and ultimately resolved (mostly) with such rationality and calm. And I don't mean that because we reached agreement on many things, but because the discussion itself was focused and cogent. I can see the ambiguity in the CQ quote - in terms of whether it's making a positive claim of denying causation between Abu Ghraib photos and violence - but my only point in citing it was the lack of evidence to support the principal factual claim of Obama's (which, to me, has no bearing on the argument). Thanks again.

Weren't the Abu Ghraib photos the first, even pre-eminent method of proving that the US had been harshly interrogating prisoners? If not, what was the mechanism for the details of torture to get to the ears of prospective terrorists? How can the case be made that 'torture' was a boon for recruiting and responsible for more deaths, but that the release of Abu Ghraib photos (torture photos?)was not? Perhaps folks can unconfuse me here. Thanks Glenn.

The Abu Ghraib photos were only linked to interrogations because some of the guards claimed they had been ordered to "soften up" the prisoners for the actual interrogators. It was not, at that time, believed that we were engaged in torture but rather just mistreating Iraqi prisoners.

To understand how Guantanamo became a recruitment tool for al Qaida one has to be able to separate the terms 'al Qaida' and 'al Qaida of Mesopotamia'. The latter is the name declared by resistance organizations in Iraq and there is no evidence, that I am aware of, that there is or was any connection to al Qaida, the organization which organized the WTC attacks and which is or was headed by Usama binLaden.

Guantanamo, for the most part, was not used for the holding and interrogation of prisoners captured in Iraq. Those prisoners were kept in various jails and/or prisons in Iraq. I can't think of any prisoners or are or were at Gitmo after being captured in Iraq. Gitmo was used for prisoners captured in Afghanistan, Pakistan and/or other places and then rendered to Gitmo.

The entire world now knows that we practiced torture at Guantanamo so the release of the additional photos will not "shock" anyone who has been following these events. On the other hand, the abu Ghraib photos were shocking because they were the first proof that we were treating prisoners horribly. Because it was a big deal and because it was in Iraq that the maltreatment took place, it served as a recruitment tool for al Qaida in Mesopotamia more than the original al Qaida. That's not to say that al Qaida didn't gain some recruits because of it, but it was generally thought that most of the recruits resulting from the abu Ghraib photos went to Iraq, not Afghanistan.

We should also remember that the increase in casualties in Iraq was not totally due to attacks by terrorists but rather by ordinary insurgents which were being called terrorists by the Bush adminsitration (primarily Rumsfeld and Cheney). IOW, most of those casualties cannot be tied to al Qaida at all.

Did the photos cause some Arabs not from Iraq to travel there and join the resistance? Probably. Are those non-Iraqis responsible for a high percentage of our casualties? Probably not.

In anycase, for Obama to claim that he's not releasing them because of fear of increased casualties to our troops is, frankly, bullshit. Bombing wedding parties and killing women and kids causes more damage to our troops than any photos can.

If you are interested in learning more about this, I've linked a site which can be used for that purpose at my signature.