I'm Sorry, But -- there are only Two Possibilities WRT Sy Hersh.

[Leopolds Ghost]

This also applies to any other "explosive" evidence that is allegedly already known by someone, but never came out.

Such as a letter to the editoer (LTTE) I was GOING to send in 2000, but didn't.

Here are the two possibilities WRT the Abu Ghraib tapes Sy Hersh was talking about.

1. Sy Hersh has the evidence, in which case, why the hell didn't he go public in 2004??? He didn't have to send the tapes to anyone -- merely meet with senior reporters, demonstrate that he had the tapes, describe in writing what is on them, and prove that they are the same tapes Congresscritters already saw in 2004. The fact that he never done this, especially after Kerry said there was an October surprise, speaks volumes.

It is like me -- I ALMOST wrote a LTTE in 2000 complaining about the fact that US News And World Report quoted the CIA as glossing over an alleged Bin Laden threat to nuke the US -- and I was going to include in my LTTE reference to the Blind Sheikh's plan to crash planes into major New York landmarks, such as the George Washington Bridge. (I remembered it vividly because I thought, "Planes are a scary thought, but WTF would anyone care about the George Washington Bridge as a terrorist target??") Oh yeah, and I considered the box-cutter threat YEARS ago, back when I heard they were legal (people used to joke about that sort of thing.) I took the threat seriously. But the point is, I DIDN'T send the letter, and that was my mistake. I didn't because I decided it wouldn't change anything. Now I know it wouldn't have changed anything but it would have been one more piece in the puzzle. But I have no hard copy to show for the LTTE I was going to write, and Sy Hersh has no hard copy to show for the things he claims to have seen.

2. Assuming Sy Hersh no longer has the videos, why does ANYONE here believe they still exist? What incentive would any of the original parties have to keep them in existence? If so, what is there to "eventually come out?"

Might as well say my LTTE will "eventually come out". :-(

[Leopolds Ghost]

1. In case anyone's wondering what I'm talking about...

Sy Hersh: "They (Bushco) Are in Total Terror It will Come Out"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2148785&mesg_id=2148785

[bananas]

2. I thought he said he saw the videos, not that he had a copy of it. nt

[Lerkfish]

3. that was also my understanding: he was SHOWN the videos by a source

but not allowed to copy or take them.

[havocmom]

4. Read the same thing- he saw them, not HAD them

Odd how the three of us remember it the same way and just different enough from how the OP interpreted to make the meaning entirely different from OT. We must be conspirators or something ;)

[Leopolds Ghost]

5. YES, WHICH MEANS THEY NO LONGER EXIST

Read the O frickin' P, people.

I said there are TWO OPTIONS -- either he had access to them, or he don't.

If he don't, then whoever did (e.g. the government, or a witness the government ended up prosecuting) obviously destroyed them or turned them in to be destroyed. They're not just sitting on a shelf somewhere.

If he don't have a copy, then the previous post on this subject, referenced above, is incorrect in asserting that the tapes will "eventually" come out.

Assuming Sy Hersh has no copy of them, they no longer exist. he is just blowing off steam.

WTF do you think I referenced my LTTE for???? I NEVER WROTE IT --

THUS DRAWING THE ANALOGY TO THE FACT THAT I BELIEVE SY HERSH NEVER ACTUALLY KEPT A COPY OF THE TAPES.

Geezus. Read the entire OP before replying.

[havocmom]

8. De-caf

It's a good thing.

I did read it.

[Leopolds Ghost]

10. I'm just frustrated by all the "When this shit hits the fan" posts.

Elsewhere on DU.

Which have been going on since before the election.

I'm not claiming they are "conspiracy minded" or raise "false hope" or are "unproven" I am merely thinking that it's pointless to discuss "evidence!" that has not been produced, or in the case of something sensitive like this, documented by multiple witnesses who are willing to come forward. Until then, it might as well not exist.

Occam's razor suggests that if there were powerful evidence of crimes being committed AND someone with access to said evidence who refused to believe that prosecuting those responsible would "tear the country apart", then said evidence would be leaked to someone, somewhere in more than a hypothetical sense. Or a "I know all about it, I can't say more, more will come out when the shit hits the fan" sense. :hi:

[havocmom]

11. Frustrating I understand

but there are other forms of exercise than just jumping to conclusions.

De-caf. It's a good thing.

[Recursion]

9. I disagree

If he don't, then whoever did (e.g. the government, or a witness the government ended up prosecuting) obviously destroyed them or turned them in to be destroyed. They're not just sitting on a shelf somewhere.

Ah, you don't live in DC, do you? In this town, we call tapes like that "leverage", and we make damn sure we have a copy in case we need a favor from whoever the dirt is on.

[converted_democrat]

12. Great point.. n/t

[Leopolds Ghost]

13. But the problem is, it's difficult to do that with

(a) state secrets, such as classified war footage, not in general release, that could be used by the enemy (e.g. Valerie Plame's identity)

(b) material that should be illegal to posess, except as criminal evidence.
(e.g. footage of child abuse at Abu Ghraib, or footage of marines killing people)

It's hard to use that sort of thing as leverage without being
prosecuted for revealing it, except to the proper authorities, who --
yep -- already have it.

[Leopolds Ghost]

14. Also, this implies there are a lot of sold-out gov't agency folks

Who are willing to stash away this stuff in a desk, not to be revealed unless something bad happens to them at work. I realize those people exist, and sometimes become whistleblowers, but it seems to me that model is ill-suited for something like this, where direct evidence of a crime is being witheld from... who, well, from the authorities who already have this stuff and have decided to seal it in order to protect our troops. Meaning it will be destroyed when the last trial is over. Then one of these Gene Hackman Deep Throat whistleblower types does what with the stuff in his bottom drawer, 30 years from now? Ask his wife to destroy it, most likely, because his leverage kept him in excellent standing with his bosses.

[Leopolds Ghost]

6. OF Course Not -- that would be illegal.

Which implies the tapes were destroyed, since they were in the possession of the government and LEAKED to Sy Hersh by way of a screening.

[Leopolds Ghost]

7. I SAID there are Two Options -- either he Just Saw them, OR

OR he had a copy and I Stongly preferenced the "just saw them" theory
("Sorry But")... the gist of the OP is that there's NO EVIDENCE, OK??

IF he Just Saw them by means of a semi-official screening, then there is no reason to believe the rest of the tapes were not destroyed. The Pentagon does not have channels for just putting this sort of thing on a shelf somewhere. If it's not going to be used as evidence, then it WILL have been destroyed which means EVERY TIME someone says "one day this -- and everything else, such as the discredited memos" -- will come out" is just fooling themselves. The tracks have already been covered and "bulldozed under".

Again, I reference my LTTE from 2000, which you didn't comment on, presumably because you know I CAN'T PRODUCE IT.

Same dilemma applies.

[Lerkfish]

16. nor is there any reason to believe the tapes WERE destroyed, either

you seem to be fixating on that they were destroyed, which is your surmise, based on nothing that I can determine other then your own circular logic

to wit: if hersh no longer has them or never had them, they must have been destroyed.

A does not lead to C in this case.

[converted_democrat]

19. BS-

"I SAID there are Two Options -- either he Just Saw them, OR
he had a copy and I Stongly preferenced the "just saw them" theory
("Sorry But")... the gist of the OP is that there's NO EVIDENCE, OK??"

Wrong, unless your a mind reader, how do you know that there is NO EVIDENCE? Our congress critters have seen the tapes.. Graham confirmed rape and murder.. Even *if* you're right and the evidence has been destroyed (And I really doubt you're right about that) our congress critters have seen the evidence.. If they were destroyed than the DOD has at the very least congress to answer to. There are far more than just two possibilities here.. Sy has seen them and congress has seen them..

[Leopolds Ghost]

21. If Graham confirmed what Sy has said, than the fat lady has already sung.

The BFEE and MSM have already successfully established the meme that if such atrocities were committed, they were the actions of a few... short of some eyewitness to the video coming forward saying "you don't know the half of it", no minds will be changed by simply talking about what was revealed already, in 2004, because the MSM will simply say "yes, we covered that story."

Like that guy from Slate saying to Derek McGinty :-( "The answer to your question is nobody cares about this Valerie Plame stuff but us media types" and laughing together with that political analyst from NBC, while David Corn looked on uncomfortably.

MSM can't say "the story refuses to die" unless new details emerge, if they can say "you already mentioned this two years ago" then, well...

Point is, folks were saying this was one of those issues where if the 25% loyal Bush supporters knew the truth. Well, the truth is not going to be based on Sy Hersh's second-hand account than it probably won't be based on Graham (the guy who was co-sponsoring the NSA act?) or some other congressman mumbling "you don't know the half of it" unless they have a bloody shirt to wave in the form of a physical tape.

[Lerkfish]

23. apparently, there are only TWO possibilities that can fit in YOUR head

at one time. Others have brought up other possibilities that you cannot disprove any more than you can prove your own two possibilites to any satisfaction, since the provenance would require information that none of us are privy to.

in other words, whether you accept it or not, there are at LEAST 3 possibilities:

1. Hersh and Graham lied and there never was any evidence (possible, but unlikely)
2. Hersh and Graham told the truth, and the evidence was destroyed (this is YOUR contention, possible -- but it is also unlikely that the BFEE would destroy evidence AFTER it had been witnessed by congress and select media. If anything, they would have destroyed it before anyone could see it.)
3. Hersh and Graham told the truth, and the evidence still exists, but it would be suicide (political and real suicide) to produce it while these guys are in power or at this juncture. I consider this the most likely possibility. Remember, BFEE has simply ignored court rulings to produce the evidence, claiming "national security", and they have jailed and threatened journalists with charges of treason, a promise they seem willing to carry out. A prudent person would be circumspect in announcing they possessed any such material, until such a time as their safety could be guaranteed.

[converted_democrat]

15. Hold up, I think you're forgetting an important point.. Our congress

critters saw some, if not all, of the tapes and pics.. Graham was quoted as confirming both rape and murder.. If they've been shown to congress critters, and the likes of Sy, the chances that there are more copies becomes much more likely.. (Not to mention how tough it would be to explain to congress that the evidence just up and walked away after many had already viewed it.) This isn't as if this is something Sy just dreamed up, Graham confirmed the rape and murder angle..

[Leopolds Ghost]

22. But Congress was discussing destroying the Abu Ghraib tapes

In order to prevent them from being used by Al Quaeds as a recoruiting device.

And they clearly don't seem to have been "inspired" by the tapes to believe that the people who committed these acts were "fruit from the poisoned tree".

Maybe if, say, the 25% of Americans who are die hard Bush supporters had access to the tapes, they would merely be bludgeoned by them, and it would not change minds. It doesn't seem to have changed minds in Congress, except perhaps on the narrow question of whether we should torture prople.

[converted_democrat]

25. I guess I read that differently than you do..

I find it pretty significant that members of *'s party are standing up against him on the torture issue.. I am by no means a scholar on the subject, but the way I understand it the President wants to "clarify" the GC because he wants to lessen the likelihood that he and his friends end up in real trouble over what they've been up to for the last few years.. My theory is that the congress critters saw the prisoner abuse and realized that it was sooo bad that it could be viewed as if it was a common occurrence, and they're trying to either stop it, or at least make sure that their objections are heard loud and clear. Remember, when the members looked at the evidence some became quite sick, and had to leave the gallery. I have a feeling it was pretty bad.

Just because it hasn't come out yet doesn't mean it doesn't exist, or that they've been destroyed. Someone it Washington has copies, power is a funny thing, and copies of that would be the ultimate power. Things like that aren't just destroyed..

And as for the last 25%, who cares? There isn't anything short of * eating a live baby on TV that would lessen him in their eyes.. You just have to work around the backwash..

[Richard Steele]

17. "BARGAINING CHIPS" is why I guarantee many copies still exist.

This particular species of RAT never abandons a sinking
ship in an orderly fashion like our noble friend Ratus Ratus.

No, they have a bizarre, self-defeating instinct to wait until
orderly evacuation is no longer a possibility, and then tear
each other to pieces near the exit.

You can bet that EVERYONE who had a chance to copy those
disks has done so, and has spent a LOT of time planning
how to use them.
To use them either to BLACKMAIL fellow co-coveruppers
or to 'cut a deal' to testify against them, depending
upon the circumstances of the moment.

[havocmom]

20. You, sir, understand power

and those who covet it. :thumbsup:

Who actually belives all those wire taps are to keep track of terrorists?

J. Edgar would have been king if he had the technology available now.

[Richard Steele]

24. *MISTER* HOOVER had the technology available THEN...

And he had POWER that Kings
and Emperors throughout history
had only DREAMPT of.

TECHNOLOGY comes and goes; it changes with the times...
but POWER is a concept hardwired into the mammalian nervous system.

[havocmom]

26. not quite the same technology

Took longer and more storage space
And he was not a king, but you're close ;)

[goclark]

18. If I had the tapes I would say I "saw" them

and never had them.

He likes living and that is what he needs to say.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

27. He doesn't want to be "Dan Rathered" - if he doesn't have hard proof

another heroic journalist would bite the dust.

[Oilwellian]

28. They haven't been released for a very simple reason....

There are 140,000 Americans in the middle of Iraq. Should these videos become public, the repercussions could be horrendous.

As a reminder, there aren't just 19 videos. According to Salon:

The CID materials contain two different forensic reports. The first, completed June 6, 2004, in Tikrit, Iraq, analyzed a seized laptop computer and eight CDs and found 1,325 images and 93 videos of "suspected detainee abuse." The second report, completed a month later in Fort Belvoir, Va., analyzed 12 CDs and found "approximately 280 individual digital photos and 19 digital movies depicting possible detainee abuse." It remains unclear why and how the CID narrowed its set of forensic evidence to the 279 images and 19 videos that we reproduce here.

http://www.salon.com/news/abu_ghraib/2006/03/14/introduction/index.html

The 19 videos we all know about aren't the worst of it. Those are what's been made available for public viewing. It's the remaining 74 videos that Congress must have seen and is being kept from the public.