Detainee photo provision dropped from war-funding bill

[sabra]

Source: CNN

WASHINGTON (CNN) — Senate and House negotiators tasked with finalizing a compromise on a $105 billion bill to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan rejected a provision Thursday night that would have prohibited the release of detainee abuse photos.

The provision was dropped after President Barack Obama raised objections in a letter addressed to the chairmen of the House and Senate Appropriations Committees.

"I'm writing to urge you to oppose the McConnell Amendment," the president wrote, referring to Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell's attempt to block the photos from being made public.

In the letter, Obama restated his own opposition to releasing the photos and his belief that "that the most direct consequence of releasing them would be to further inflame anti-American opinion and to put our troops in greater danger." But the president bowed to the political reality: if the legislation included the ban, it would not have enough votes to be approved in the House, where liberal Democrats have demanded that all information be released regarding the detention of enemy combatants.

"I deeply appreciate all you have done to help with the effort to secure funding for the troops, and assure you that I will continue to take every legal and administrative remedy available to me to ensure the DoD detainee photographs are not released. Should a legislative solution prove necessary, I am committed to working with the Congress to enact legislation that achieves the objectives we share," added Obama.

Read more: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/06/11/detainee-photo-provision-dropped-from-war-funding-bill/

[Mermaid7]

1. Right or Wrong, Slipping the Weannie

I hate having these kind of provisions piggyback any bill that has nothing to do with the other.

To me it always seems to be 'slipping something in' or trying to 'hide the weannie'.

I think each bill should be for what it stands for, only, and nonething else.

[grahamhgreen]

2. So they want to hide the evidence of criminality, but will cave temporarily for 105 billion... sad.

[Mermaid7]

3. I wish I could have said it as well. NM

[BlueJessamine]

4. Abuse Photos Part of Agreement on Military Spending

Source: New York Times

WASHINGTON — Congressional negotiators reached tentative agreement on Thursday on a $105.9 billion spending measure that would provide money for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan through September but would drop a ban on the release of photographs showing abuse of foreign prisoners held by United States forces.

The deal was concluded after Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff, went to the Capitol to assure Senate Democrats that President Obama would use all administrative and legal means to prevent the photos’ release. At the same time, a federal court issued a ruling effectively ensuring that the photos would not be released for months, if ever.

Mr. Obama followed up with a letter, promising to work with Congress if legislation was necessary to keep the photos from being publicized but urging lawmakers not to let the dispute interfere with freeing up the money for the armed forces.

“Given the singular importance of providing funding for our troops, it is essential that Congress pass the supplemental appropriations bill,” Mr. Obama wrote in the letter, which was read publicly at the negotiating session by Senator Daniel K. Inouye, Democrat of Hawaii and the Appropriations Committee chairman.


Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/12/us/politics/12cong.html?ref=global-home

[snot]

5. Wow. k&r'd.

[annabanana]

6. This is about the Graham-Lieberman ban that they threatened to

attach to every single piece of legislation until they get in into one. There must be pictures of these two pointing and laughing at a naked stack of Iraqis somewhere in the portfolio...

[Soylent Brice]

7. okay...

let me get this straight. the deal is no ban on th release of photos, but funding will go on for the illegal occupation in Iraq?? did i just read that?

[mbperrin]

9. Right. No statutory ban on release of the photos, but the administration

promises to fight tooth and nail to conceal photographic evidence of atrocities committed by US troops, if only the funding for the same illegal, bullshit, immoral, fucked up mess of a war is continued.

My tax dollars paid for every atrocity in those photos, and I want to see them now. Period. I'm mad as hell now, and I want to know what to be mad about precisely and at whom, precisely.

[thunder rising]

8. I do believe it's only in the instructions to the committee ... not the bill ... yet