Since May 13, when President Barack Obama reversed an early decision to release 44 photos of torture and abuse of suspects held at secret prisons after the September 11 attacks, there has been a flurry of stories and rising temperatures in wwwLand regarding what those photos contain. Moreover, because there was briefly talk of releasing hundreds of additional photos - up to 2000 - speculation has been rife about what those depict.
The photos have been sought by the American Civil Liberties Union as part of the organization's diligent effort to obtain ALL documents, photos and videos of prisoner abuse at Guantánamo detention center in Cuba, Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, and secret prisons in various countries, including Morocco. A federal district court judge ordered the 44 photos released in 2006, and a federal appeals court upheld the lower court in late 2008. For three weeks starting April 24, it appeared the administration would make them public.
Since the decision was made not to release them, we've had dozens of fiery diaries and countering diaries on the subject here at Daily Kos, including many that made the Recommended List and some on the Front Page by Contributing Editor mcjoan and me.
The main claim - focused on in stories May 15 and May 28 by the British paper, the Daily Telegraph - is that contained in some of those photos are depictions of rape, including the rape of a teen-aged boy, and and threats of rape, in addition to other abuse not seen in previously released photos, like the 279 published by Salon.com in 2006.
Now Mark Benjamin, a Salon contributor who has done excellent work covering torture and related stories for several years, has a new post up regarding what a Defense Department official has told him is in all 2000 photos.
Benjamin writes:
What do these unreleased images actually depict? A Defense Department official who has seen the unreleased images consented to give Salon some details. Salon agreed to keep the identity of the defense official private in exchange for the opportunity to interview a person with firsthand knowledge of the images.
Specifically, the official said there are about 2,000 images related to detainee abuse, none of which are from Abu Ghraib, and the images do not include depictions of sexual abuse. The official said the government does not have secret images of rape buried in its files.
The official told Salon that the Pentagon has compiled around 2,000 images of possible detainee abuse in response to the ACLU's suit. Salon then asked, via e-mail, whether any of the 2,000 images "[show] a possible rape or sexual abuse" of the sort described in the media recently. The Daily Telegraph had reported that there were images of a male soldier forcing oral sex on a female detainee and a male translator anally raping a male detainee. "We don't have anything that would comport to what they are reporting," the official answered. (The official did not address whether any such images had ever existed.) Retired Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba, whom the Telegraph had quoted as confirming that there were rape images among the unreleased material, told Salon on Friday that the Telegraph's report was inaccurate because he was quoted in a way that suggested he had seen the unreleased material. He has not. (The Daily Beast has since corrected its Friday story to say that none of the 44 photos "subject to the ACLU lawsuit and reviewed by President Obama" are sexually explicit.)
The official further clarified that the Defense Department is not withholding any additional images or video of apparent detainee abuse from the notorious Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. Salon published all of that material back in 2006, which included images of prisoners being forced to masturbate and to simulate oral sex. The Pentagon is not aware of any other images of abuse from the prison. "You have the whole set of Abu Ghraib," the official said. "There are no 'X Files' of images sitting somewhere else of Abu Ghraib."
While it is probably no surprise to many people that the 44 photos contain no depictions of rape, I am surprised that none of the 2000 photos have such depictions, according to the unnamed source. I suspect many other long-time observers of U.S. involvement in torture during the Cheney-Bush era will also be surprised at this.
Of course, it is an unnamed source. The administration also is taking every road it can to ensure that the public never sees those photos. And, since the source said none of the 2000 photos are from Abu Ghraib, perhaps there are additional, as-yet-unseen photos from that notorious prison that do depict rape and other abuse. The source does say there are no such photos hidden in its files. But is s/he specifically referring to any photos, period?
Without independent verification, speculation is bound to continue. The administration does itself no favors by continuing to withhold the photos.