Army: No Felony in Release of Corpse Pics ("gore for porn" scandal)

[sabra]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/n/a/200...

Army: No Felony in Release of Corpse Pics

The Army said Wednesday its investigators could not confirm that grisly photographs of purported Iraqi war dead on an Internet site were posted by U.S. soldiers, but the matter has stirred concern at the Pentagon.


Paul Boyce, an Army spokesman, said the Army's Criminal Investigation Division in recent days concluded from a preliminary inquiry that there was insufficient evidence to pursue felony charges against anyone.


"While this may not rise to the level of a felony crime, it's still serious," Boyce said.


Boyce and other officials said that while no criminal investigation would be pursued based on currently available evidence, it remained possible that disciplinary action could be taken against individual soldiers if it can be verified that they used government computers to transmit digital photographs of Iraqi war dead. Such an act could be deemed a violation of Article 134 of the Uniformed Code of Military Justice, which proscribes behavior that undermines good order and discipline or brings discredit to the military.

[rodeodance]

1. gues we do not have to worry about the ethics of doing this!

[shraby]

2. Read the Geneva Convention...

these actions are illegal as hell.

[MADem]

4. Even without Geneva, it is conduct unbecoming

...this flabby "not a felony" business is in itself, conduct unbecoming. And then there is the GENERAL ARTICLE:

Though not specifically mentioned in this chapter, all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, and crimes and offenses not capital, of which persons subject to this chapter may be guilty, shall be taken cognizance of by a general, special or summary court-martial, according to the nature and degree of the offense, and shall be punished at the discretion of that court. http://www.constitution.org/mil/ucmj19970615.htm

They can use the UCMJ to beat the ever loving shit out of anyone for anything, and they are playing the HELPLESS card in this instance? Please!!!!

Jesus, there was more honor and dignity in military service back under consciencious Clinton than their ever has been under "Hell no, I won't go" Monkeyboy....

[NYC]

16. How can they condemn the soldiers for flaunting corpses

when they themselves flaunted the corpses of Hussein's sons.

(Actually, they can because they are hypocrites, but the behavior is the same. Rumsfeld set an example for the soldiers.)

[MADem]

17. File that under two wrongs don't make a right

And absent a change in regulations, the soldiers are duty bound to uphold the regs.

But your point is taken--follow the leader....lousy leader though he is...

[nookiemonster]

22. Yes. Leadership is responsible.

Period.

"Leadership" is "supposedly" why they enjoy the perks that some of them obtain. They understand that it's ultimately their ass on the line at the end of the day.

Ask anyone who has served.

This shit goes all the way up the chain of command, without a doubt.

[saigon68]

19. UDAY HUSSEIN RECONSTRUCTED YIKES GRAPHIC

A body said by U.S. Central Command to be the corpse of former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein's son, Uday, lies in the US air force morgue at the Baghdad airport July 25, 2003. U.S. forces in Iraq partly rebuilt the severely damaged faces of two bodies shown to journalists in an effort to try to convince Iraqis that the battle-scarred corpses were those of Saddam Hussein's widely feared sons. Photo by Pool/


HERE IS THE HANDIWORK OF THE BUSH CRIMINALS

FROM CNN

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/07/25/sprj.irq.sons... /


The U.S. military took the unusual step of allowing reporters to view and videotape the bodies Friday at close range and in extensive detail after acknowledging that still photos released Thursday may not have been enough proof for many Iraqis.

The Coalition Provisional Authority, the U.S.-backed administration in Iraq, maintains that Saddam's sons were killed in an hours-long firefight with U.S. soldiers in the northern city of Mosul on Tuesday.

Most newspapers in the region didn't get the photos Thursday in time for Friday's editions.

Iraqis were able to view the video images on Arab television in many cafes and other public places Friday.

[YDogg]

3. Another thread had some more ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

[Ruby Romaine]

5. U.S. Army ends probe on porn site photos of Iraq corpses

WASHINGTON, Sept 28 (Reuters) - The U.S. Army after a brief inquiry has failed to determine whether U.S. soldiers provided grisly photos of people killed in the Iraq war to a porn Web site in exchange for free access to it, officials said on Wednesday

The numerous graphic pictures posted on the Web site showed men, with their faces visible and wearing what looked like U.S. military uniforms, standing over a charred corpse, mutilated dead bodies and severed body parts.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N28310515.htm

[Ruby Romaine]

6. that was fast!

n/t

[thecodewarrior]

7. Give me a break

It says the names of the troops naked in the pics, I'm sure if they had 2.5 terabyte on Atta, they also have some datamining to simply look up troop names.

[truthpusher]

8. Army won't pursue charges over photos (traded for porn) showing war dead

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05272/579659.stm

Army won't pursue charges over photos showing war dead
-----------------
Thursday, September 29, 2005
By Josh White, The Washington Post
-----------------
WASHINGTON -- U.S. Army officials are looking into allegations that soldiers have been trading gruesome digital pictures of war victims in Iraq and Afghanistan for access to an amateur pornography Web site, but officials said yesterday that there is insufficient evidence to pursue criminal charges.

The allegations surfaced last week, when the East Bay Express, a weekly newspaper in the San Francisco area, published a story about graphic photographs that appeared on one section of the Web site. The photographs, which show the bodies of several people killed in shootings, explosions or fires, include crude captions, some of which mock the dead.

(snip)

The Web site's creator, Chris Wilson, said yesterday that about 30,000 members of the military are registered on his site, several thousand of whom have sent him photographs or comments from their official military Web addresses. Many photographs depict life in Iraq, while only a few are extremely graphic, he said.

"It's an uncensored view of the war, from their perspective," said Wilson, 27, of Florida, who began accepting the photos from soldiers as payment for access to porn on his site. "It's a place where the soldiers can express themselves without being filtered by the Bush administration."

(snip)

complete story: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05272/579659.stm

[Canuckistanian]

9. Ah, just a bunch of guys blowing off, er, steam, so to speak

Nothing sick or mentally deranged about it at all.

[MADem]

10. Only ONE possible REASON why they aren't moving ahead with this

No, not that they don't care, or that they are not aware of the possible blowback this story could cause if it took hold on tv, but the reason they probably are not prosecuting is because their are TOO MANY INDIVIDUALS.

Bet there's an ex post facto directive concerning that sort of behavior in play now.

[RaleighNCDUer]

11. Besides, making it an issue could result in a lot of

'unfortunate' pictures hitting the MSM -- the sort of photos the military and the government don't want the public to see. Like the well known 'naked vietnamese girl fleeing napalm' and 'ARVN office executing viet cong prisoner'. Or one of my favorites, from a private collection, the Marine I worked with holding the severed head of a VC. Those sort of pictures made America aware of what war in vietnam was really like. This government does not want similar pictures from Iraq hitting the mainstream -- Abu Grahib was bad enough.

They want it to die off quietly.

[truthpusher]

12. I don't doubt anything you have to say....

....not only the gruesome photos, even the day to day stuff could be damning.

[Love Bug]

20. My take on it exactly

Those pics on that website show the true obscenity, not the porn. The Pentagon is afraid public opinion of the war (read "Bush") will get even worse if those are shown widely in the MSM. Their whole "investigation" was a sham.

[Democrats_win]

13. G.I. Necrophilia perverts! How proud they've made their mothers.

[truthpusher]

14. Nice...I hope you enjoy the responses from the military people....

...who might read what you are saying as a blanket statement against all military.

[Kailassa]

15. well, if they're into necrophiliac photography ...

The topic is addressing a particular behaviour. Anyone not guilty of that behaviour is not being referred to. I'd credit "the military people" with the ability to understand that, and hope that most would condemn this behviour themselves.

[MADem]

18. Actually, I would imagine they are into porn

...and they know they can get that desirable item if they have the right images to trade for it, which could shape their shutterbugging. Nowadays, most kids have little cameras with them, and with the digital technology, it isn't like you run out of film like in the old days...

[Eugene]

21. Pentagon reponse: Soldiers can't post pics on websites anymore.

From today's Boston Globe...

Military tightens use of electronic media

Move follows alleged posting of gruesome photos from Iraq

By Bryan Bender, Globe Staff | September 29, 2005

WASHINGTON -- The Pentagon has tightened guidelines governing the use
of photography, e-mail, Web logs, and other electronic media by US
troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, amid allegations that some soldiers
snapped close-up photographs of corpses in Iraq and posted them on a
pornographic website.

<snip>

However, to avoid such violations in the future, commanders have
updated the rules for using the Internet and other communications
technologies such as digital cameras, which have captured the brutal
reality on the ground in Iraq like perhaps no previous conflict.

A bulletin issued yesterday to US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan
outlined new "Internet security" guidelines. Among other things, the
one-page memo warned troops against posting "any photographs on any
websites."

<snip>

Full article: http://www.boston.com/news/world/articles/2005/09/29/mi...

[MADem]

23. I wonder which poor bastard had to stay late at the Pentagon

to gin up that directive...and have it rewritten a hundred times before it got to Rummy, who probably redpenciled the whole thing and they had to start all over.

Poor sod probably slept under his or her desk for a night or two...