Blogcritics Comments on Salon.com Offers Abu Ghraib Photos In Exchange for Their Soul

Comment by Jason Small

Tue, 14 Mar 2006 10:06:35 EST

I'm so tired of people misusing Jesus' words like this. It just betrays a fundamental misunderstanding to attempt to quote him in a case like this. Sigh.

Comment by Professor Pan

Thu, 9 Mar 2006 12:25:56 EST

I'm with JP. I think it's a poor choice on Salon's part to use the photos to capture lapsed subscribers. But until illegal, secret gulags and policies allowing torture are eliminated, the Abu Ghraib photos are testimony to what is wrong with the current leadership in the Pentagon and the White House. Until apologists for torture are replaced, the photos help us understand why the Bush administration are losing the "war on terror." Ignoring abuse won't make it go away. Does that mean I'm bashing Bush? If so, good. It's important to bash amoral cronies when they're running my country off a cliff.

Comment by JP

Thu, 9 Mar 2006 08:01:56 EST

I agree that this should NOT be used as a way to pump "premium subscribers" for more money. Salon often publishes interesting and well-written work, and should market itself based upon its track record and its merits, not by teasing the audience about photos it may soon release. However, I disagree that the only benefit in publishing these photos would be to "stir up even more anger." This reminds me of Sean Hannity's response to everything, which is "you're undermining the troops." I vehemently disagree with this type of reasoning, which is often used simply to squash dissent. As a further point of disagreement, I do not think that for most people, the primary object of negative feelings is even the troops. I think the entire scandal says much more about our military LEADERSHIP than it does about the troops themselves, who are often simply following orders and following guidance they receive about what types of treatment are permissible. Personally, I don't think it even says that military leadership "told" the troops to take such measures, I think it's more that the leaders FAILED to tell them NOT to. And finally, given the Bush administration's use of the "signing statement" to undermine the McCain anti-torture bill last fall, I believe this is both current and relevant, so it should not be suppressed. I think it should be published without being hidden behind a subscriber wall, because it's clear the public isn't upset ENOUGH about what's going on to ensure that Bush Inc. follows the law.

Comment by Elsa

Thu, 9 Mar 2006 07:46:09 EST

Ugh. Not something you want to read this early in the morning. This is abhorrent.