1 Wow, he lives!

2 well it may show that we are an open society, one that is willing to allow its citizens and also others to view our mistakes and also watch how we deal with those who make these mistakes. If all that are to blame for these failings are punished it would go along way to helping moderste muslims view us as liberators and not occupiers. The "hearts and minds" approach instead of the fear of massive firepower.

3 I you think for one munute that showing these pictures and punishing the guilty will win their hearts and minds if we don't have them already then you truly are fantasizing. They want to show the pictures to keep the war going; to keep people angry over something that happened two years ago, because if the war ends and Iraq becomes a democratic republic it takes the wind out of their sails. --They "do not" want us to win-- They think that the longer they can keep it going the less likely that we will win. They did not want this war and they're determined to make sure it doesn't succeed. They don't care if England or anyone else gets punished. They want Bush impeached over it. Nothing less will make them happy than to end the war and impeach Bush. Period. Those are the bare and simple facts.

4 That's "If you think".

5 Moderate Mooslims? what iz thiz moderate mooslim of which you speak?

6 you can place Muslim's into two categories, no need for the moderate view. 1.) Those who will cut your fucking head off and place it on a pike for their religion. 2.) those who will question if the West's aggression / Joooo's were to blame for your head being cut off and put on a pike, then silently support it.

7 My question is this: Is there no appeal venue from this ruling? Has an appeal been tried? Surely this guy does not have the final word? Does anybody know?

8 Time to give this idiot judges the toe of the boot boincing him down the courtroom steps till he hits bottom followed by the ACLU lawyers

9 My understanding is that the Pentagon has 20 days to decide to appeal it. They will probably wait until near the end of the 20 days and appeal. It will go to the Second Circuit. Then onto the supremes, I think.

10 Correct me if I'm looking at this from the wrong perspective... Didn't a court recently rule that Debra LaFave's "evidence photos" couldn't be released under the FOI act, thereby protecting her from the embarassment of having her coochie all over the internet (as opposed to simply all over her students)? Now another court rules that it would be a violation of the same act to not release photos that put American Soldiers and Citizens at greater risk because of those photos' certainty of being plastered all over the internet? What am I missing?

11 BoDiddly said: "What am I missing"? You are missing a judge who has no patriotism and does not care whether he puts his fellow Americans at greater risk of being murdered by radical Islamists.

12 A few questions: A) Is showing these photos REALLY going to piss anybody off more than they already are? I mean, everyone knows they exist, will actually seeing them make things worse? B) Isn't the risk/cost worth it? The only way that we can continue to claim the moral high ground is to live up to our ideals, which is a free and open society. We have to allow them to become public as part of the democratic process, and to show the world that we aren't "protecting our own". Not to win their hearts and minds, not because of anybody else, just so we can continue to claim the righteousness of our cause. C) Slightly off subject, but the two year old terrorist magnet article claimed that the US presence in Iraq was giving terrorist types a big juicy target. A large, well-armed military force in a foreign country with drastically lower risk of US civilian casualties then, say, other potential targets in downtown New York. How is this a bad thing?

13 Timster, I understand your point to a degree. The thing we cannot expect or count on is that they will be used solely for the purpose you claim. To assume that things can't get any worse as a result of their release is a mistake. It's not much different than squirting just one more pint of lighter fluid on a house that's already burning and thinking, "hey, what's one more pint?" and forgetting that the original idea was to put the fire out because there's one more person trapped in a back room. To think that this is a danger only to American soldiers is wrong. We're not just "protecting our own". This can well cause the deaths of more innocent people. The Newsweek article about Koran abuse alone incited riots and death. Ideologically you're right. Realistically, you're wrong. You have to weigh the pros and cons. Some things are not worth the risk/cost. Do we "need" to see more pictures? No. The soldiers are being charged one by one and standing trial. How much is enough? If we stood idly by without charging those guilty, I could understand. But that's not the case.

14 Would the Military and certain politians sacrifice low raking members of the military to protect themselves and appease the asskissers? You bet they would. I have seen it happen in person. We cannot trust ridiculous military hearings anymore than we can trust the lack of them. I have been present when a commanding officer said we want to have a trail and this is how I want it to come out. Could this be a message to both the prosecutor and the defense. Remember, the defense is a low ranking military officer who wishes to have a career in the military and the Commanding Officer makes out his fitness report.

15 The judge was a Clinton appointee.