Remember this photo?

[NNN0LHI]

http://www.inminds.co.uk/end-occupation-rally-1-12apr03.html

Hooded Iraqi prisoner of war comforting his four year old son

"the humiliation of proud men and the shameful acts committed against them in front of their children and wife constitutes a war crime"

And this one?

"The Americans claim that they have launched this attack to remove Saddam and establish democracy and freedom in Iraq, but they deliberately turn a blind eye to the fact that they were the ones who backed him with everything they had to pave the way for him to perpetrate his criminal acts..."

[indigobusiness]

1. Rumsfeld punished Abu Ghraib style

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

2. Damn, Rummy does get around.

I heard there's other pics with a cop, a sailor, a Native American, a biker........

[indigobusiness]

9. He needs lots of

punishing.

[Alerter_]

3. Lcpl Boudraux killed my dad and knocked up my sister!

Even the freepers admit it's true - Thumbs Up! - http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1115829/posts

[Alerter_]

5. and just to show how desperate and in denial Freepers really are

Now, they weren't raping and sodomizing, they were "fixing"! yeah, that's the ticket!

To: lonewacko_dot_com

this is an image i edited to change the text, it was very simply to modify the text.
10 posted on 04/11/2004 11:36:12 PM PDT by chemical_boy

[mahatmakanejeeves]

33. Lcpl Boudraux

The verdict isn't in yet.

http://www.snopes.com/photos/military/boudreaux.asp

[Sir Craig]

4. At the risk of being flamed...

I agree that the photo of Rumsfeld represents the highest level of hypocrisy in this whole "war," but the photo of the Iraqi POW comforting his son is probably one of the few examples of decency that has come out of all this.

I cannot recall what the man had allegedly done, only that he was a POW. His son was wailing outside the razor wire, and the American servicemen guarding the prisoners felt horrible about the situation. Instead of shipping the son off somewhere to get him out of sight, they instead brought him into the holding area with his father and released the father's hands so he could hold and comfort his son. The bag over the father's head was meant to shield his identity from the cameras, per Geneva Convention rules, as opposed to any kind of humiliation. (POWs are not allowed to be paraded before cameras as some kind of "war trophy" -- all effort must be made to respect the prisoner's identity.)

I say this only to clarify what the picture actually shows, not to justify any other actions or spread any kind of propaganda.

[Alerter_]

6. the hoods were demanded by the Geneva Conventions? Really?

"The bag over the father's head was meant to shield his identity from the cameras, per Geneva Convention rules, as opposed to any kind of humiliation. (POWs are not allowed to be paraded before cameras as some kind of "war trophy" -- all effort must be made to respect the prisoner's identity.)"

So you mean that they wanted to take a picture, so they put the hood over this guys head, and then they took pictures, then took it off?

And all the other pictures of hoods, and the reports of the hoods being used, were all just to follow the Geneva Conventions so we could photograph them leaglly?

You're joking right? Sorry, I always miss sarcasm and irony, I'm not that clever.

[Sir Craig]

13. *Sigh* I knew this would happen...

Article 13

Prisoners of war must at all times be humanely treated. Any unlawful act or omission by the Detaining Power causing death or seriously endangering the health of a prisoner of war in its custody is prohibited, and will be regarded as a serious breach of the present Convention. In particular, no prisoner of war may be subjected to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are not justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the prisoner concerned and carried out in his interest.

Likewise, prisoners of war must at all times be protected, particularly against acts of violence or intimidation and against insults and public curiosity.

link

The hoods were not put on just for the photo ops -- they are put on because there are tons of journalists over there keeping photographic diaries of what is going on, and as the regulations state POWs must be afforded some kind of privacy from "public curiosity," which is difficult to do in an outside holding area.

As for the other pictures, the hoods were probably meant as a joke in regards to the Geneva Conventions. What those prisoners were put through was in no way a joke, though, and all those responsible should be held accountable, clear up to Shrub.

All I'm saying is this photo is not the atrocity you're looking for.

[mike1963]

16. How convenient it doesn't apply to dead ones, a la Qusay and Uday.

I better stop now...
:grr:

[Sir Craig]

18. No, you're right...

Assholes though Uday and Qusay were, BushCo had no right to parade images of their corpses. As I explain later, it was another one of those things that Rumsfeld thought was necessary (in order to verify our claims to the Iraqis that we had killed them), and again it was something that Rumsfeld was wrong about (thinking it would help stop the violence towards coalition forces)...

[Media_Lies_Daily]

26. Bullshit. Those rules are designed to keep the prisoners away from...

...hostile crowds, crowds that may want to kill a POW as he or she is being marched through civilians in an ENEMY country.

Those hoods are designed to intimidate, frighten, and ultimately, to control detainees by depriving them of the ability to see where they are, and where they are going. Those hoods are part of the overall scheme cooked up by the NeoCons to treat prisoners of war as detainees. Period.

And you believe that the "prisoner" was being protected from the "public curiousity" of the press???

Good lord...with your skill at double-speak, you should be working for the NeoCons.

Hmmmmm.

[Alerter_]

32. "this photo is not the atrocity you're looking for"

I wasn't looking for atrocities. Let's not play make-believe about this issue.

[NNN0LHI]

8. Won't show pictures of POW's, eh? Who do you think you are bullshitting?

[Sir Craig]

14. See above response

If you are still hell-bent on believing the worst, whatever...

By the way, there is a lot of argument regarding the pictures taken of Saddam Hussein, and many of them valid. On the one hand he should have been accorded the same rights as any other POW according to the Geneva Conventions, but on the other hand the government required proof for the Iraqis that Hussein had been captured.

That one is tricky, and again you can believe what you want...personally, I'm less inclined to side with the government on this one, especially given that they did it in an effort to try and stop the fighting (what a surprise that didn't work).

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[indigobusiness]

11. He wan't bagged for camera reasons

trust me.

[Sir Craig]

15. Yes he was

Trust me...

[indigobusiness]

19. Check deeper

into the facts.

[ParanoidPat]

23. Trust YOU? OK, just post a link to where ever you got that rediculous.....

....version of events that you posted. I'll stick to the story originally posted with that photo and all the others posted at the time. :)

[NNN0LHI]

25. I wouldn't hold my breath while waiting for that link if I were you PP n/t

[NNN0LHI]

34. See what I mean about not holding your breath Pat?

Trust me he says. This guy must think he is dealing with kids around here or something?

Don

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Karenina]

12. My neighborhood

is now plastered with that picture advertising a benefit for Iraqis. I understand what you are saying but must add that the indecency of the situation the photo captures has a devastating emotional impact in these parts. How one interprets the image has everything to do with perspective.

[Sir Craig]

17. I agree

I wish more than anything else that the circumstances leading up to that photo had never happened, but ShrubCo had to be pricks and drag our reputation down the tubes with their stupidity in regards to this invasion.

What you said about the interpreting of the image is precisely why I felt I had to say something about it: I am not cheering the image of a father having to comfort a terrified child while being held prisoner, but rather that the military guards did the right thing by allowing the father to comfort the child rather than come up with some other "arrangement."

I hate to see any image, good or bad, twisted by anyone for some kind of political gain. These images should be educating, not proselytizing. Sometimes, though, that is easier said than done.

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Jade Fox]

7. I want a poster of that Iraqi man and his son with this caption....

Bush Administration Family Values

[catzies]

21. Yes. Perfect. You nailed it.

n/t

[VolcanoJen]

10. The day I forget that photo will be the day I take my last breath.

That is my solemn oath.

[homelandpunk]

20. If you mean that first photo I'm with you. Jesus, it make me cry. nt

[VolcanoJen]

24. Yes, the first photo.

:-(

[arwalden]

22. Thank You For Posting That

-- Allen

[Lou_C]

30. Is that boy dead?

:shrug:

[DemoTex]

31. Thanks, Don. That is the most inflamatory picture, period.

And one of the oldest. It makes me weep.