The pictures were to be released to the ACLU. Who even says they

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

would have made them public? Was the ACLU trying to build a LEGAL CASE against the Bush administration for their criminal acts and perhaps might have held those pictures close to the vest. Is that even a possibility? Or were they working on behalf of some of the detainees and is it pertinent to their cases?

I wonder if the ACLU has spoken to this point. Was obtaining the pictures for a specific legal purpose or were they to be released for general consumption? Even if they were to be circulated, if ,as Obama himself has stated, they were no worse than what is already in the public venue, holding them back makes most jump to the conclusion that they were worse.

[ananda]

1. I signed the ACLU petition this morning..

.. urging Obama to release the photos.

Well done ACLU!

[bdamomma]

2. I signed too.

let this case go to the Supremes.

[polichick]

3. The ACLU intends to show that this wasn't the work of "a few bad apples"...

...that it was systemic and ordered from the top ~ don't know whether they plan to release them to the public.

[Rottenmac]

4. Forgive my naivete

but IF they were building a legal case against BushCo, Isn't this a smart move by Obama? I mean if he released them, then the defense >could< argue about never EVER getting a fair trial due to the 'spoiling' of the entire planet (or in this case the jury pool) therefore preventing an assembly of a fair and impartial jury?

I'm not looking for a fight, I'm just looking for any ANY justification here.

Also, as far as 'enabling the enemy' argument goes... Well, that is a load of shit. Released or not, the actions of the US including Abu Ghraib (sp) are proven to be recruiting tools for enemies of 'free-dumb' or 'um'errika' or whatever these idiots are saying...

My point is the damage is done, and my question is; could it be that Obama is playing this smart and not releasing them in order to a) prevent an international uproar (as well as recruiting BILLIONS more fighters) and/or b) Not interfering with a possible legal case that may or may not end up going to court...?

I really am trying to give the benefit of the doubt here... but my patience is wearing thinner day by day...