Perseveration is defined as "continuation of something (as repetition of a word) usually to an exceptional degree or beyond a desired point." The media quite obviously sees the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal as the ultimate indictment of the Bush administration's entire Iraq policy, all of it, and so they perseverate relentlessly. The scandal raised its head again today when the Defense Department withdrew its appeal of a federal court order to release additional photos and videos, most of which have already been published.
NEW YORK (Reuters) - The Defense Department on Tuesday agreed to release 74 photos and three videos -- many that have already been published -- that depict prisoner abuse in Abu Ghraib and were sought by civil rights groups.
[...]
In court papers, the government noted that Web site Salon.com published images depicting the treatment of detainees at Abu Ghraib prison.
According to the American Civil Liberties Union, Salon.com recently posted 279 photographs and 19 videos from Abu Ghraib on its Web site.
The Defense Department will identify any of Darby's images already published on Salon.com and release edited versions of any that may not have appeared on the Web site, it said in court documents. The pictures have been edited so the faces of the prisoners are not shown.
A U.S. defense official, who asked not to be named, said: "This stipulation only applies to the 74 photos and three videos that were part of the litigation. We reserve the right to repeat arguments and to appeal future orders to release other images."
The ACLU is positively giddy that "justice" will finally be served.
"The withdrawal of the government's appeal only confirms there was no legal basis for withholding these images from the public in the first case," ACLU attorney Amrit Singh said.
"This is a significant victory for the public's right to know the whole truth about the widespread abuse of detainees in US custody abroad."
There are a number of points worth making. First and foremost is that even if the the photos and videos were the most horrid physical abuse ever perpetrated by man against man - and to beat, for example, Saddam's activities in Iraq would take some doing - publicizing them does not, in any way, "tell the whole truth about the widespread abuse of detainees in US custody abroad." They tell a story of abuse by those in charge of the detainees at a single prison in Iraq, in the middle of a war zone, in the middle of a war. They tell a story of a command and control structure that failed - but perhaps only at that one prison.
Second, is there anyone in the US who occasionally reads the news or watches TV who does not know that prisoners were treated badly at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq 3 years ago. Is the publication of 'new' photos and videos going to inform anyone of activity that was previously unknown? No, not at all.
Third, does the prosecution of those responsible, even if it goes all the way to Donald Rumsfeld and President Bush, require the publication of the inflammatory photos? No, any efforts to "hold those responsible to account" could easily take place in the absence of publication of the photos.
No, for the ACLU and the media, in this case Reuters, this isn't about justice. And it isn't about informing the public. And it certainly isn't about horror about the level of the atrocities committed. It's about harming the project that is Iraq by undermining public support at home, and in particular it's about defeating the administration. It's just another facet of being "anti-war."
3/28/06 2320: Stop The ACLU notes the story, with pessimism about the response. Ian has a simpler version of this post at Expose The Left, asking simply "why."
