Browse By

What does a liberated Iraqi look like?

Say, have you ever wondered what a liberated Iraqi looks like? Wonder no longer. A photograph of a liberated Iraqi was provided to the world from the wife of an American “special forces” soldier. Here it is. See if you can find the liberated Iraqi:

iraqi prisoner abuse photos torture

Hmm… The man sitting in the middle? No, he’s not an Iraqi. He’s an American special forces soldier.

What about that leg coming in from the left? No, that’s another American special forces soldier.

Oh, hey! Isn’t that a piece of flesh underneath the American soldier who is sitting in the middle of the picture? Yes! You’ve found it! That’s the Iraqi! That’s what a liberated Iraqi looks like!

This photograph is just part of a big collection of photographs taken by a Navy SEAL (the best of the best!) showing other happy American soldiers sitting on a pile of Iraqis who had been handcuffed, hooded, and piled on top of each other in the back of a big truck. Oh, praises be for the liberation of Iraq!

How did this photograph get into our hands? Well, the Navy SEAL soldier who took the photographs brought them home when his tour ended. He wanted to show off to his wife, see. Then, the wife decided to post them on the Internet. She wanted to show off to all her friends, see. Oh, what a big, tough well-trained soldier her husband is!

When the wife found out that a reporter had found the photographs, she became very upset – at the reporter.

When the Navy found out about the photographs, it too was very upset. A Navy spokesman explained that it’s illegal to take pictures of prisoners.

Oh, yeah, and then there’s the problem of abusing prisoners… But, after all, that’s not illegal any more. Bush’s new Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales, says that the Geneva Conventions are “quaint” and “outdated”.

Taking unauthorized pictures, though. That’s serious! I guess we still have some liberating to do.

35 thoughts on “What does a liberated Iraqi look like?”

  1. Tirone Black says:

    Odd, isn’t it, how the conservative visitors to this site who love to complain and complain don’t even make a peep about articles like this one. It’s creepy how their silence supports the torture going on in Guantanamo Bay, Iraq and Afghanistan.

  2. HareTrinity says:

    You’re right, that is kind of creepy… What’s disturbing is how a former friend of mine has now gone so right wing to the point where he believes that Bush does more good for the world than the environment does… I’m not joking, either. He USED to be a smart guy, too; it’s like he suddenly unlearnt all of his common sense.

    Then again; he is in Texas…

  3. George Luce says:

    Democrats and Liberals and the such are all such hateful people. You truly believe that the Democrats are the peoples party and they are for all the good things in life. How wrong can you be? If you read history and look at some of the hateful and deceitful things Democrats have done you can see they are truly the anti-American party. They are for more government waste and control in individuals lives. They want you to rely on the government instead of yourself. Get a grip. They try to make the uneducated and poor paranoid. They try to convince black and other minorities they are abused. You say look at the prison scandal in Iraq but never say look at what these people are doing. You don’t look at the big picture but your narrow minded version of whats going on. Always time will tell. The Democrats are the party of lies and deceit. They are the party of no morals whatsoever. I could go on all day. The reason you lost the election is because people see you for what you are misguided and wrong for this country. The democratic party has really warped into a strange animal. I’m from Massachusetts and I see what a democratic state means. Look at California, The Terminator will turn that around and already is. Democrats = LOSERS In all aspects of life. We won get used to it and if you don’t like it here you are free to leave.

  4. J. Matthew Cook says:

    Ah, yes, George, the leave if you don’t like it mentality crops up again. It may be pesky to deal with those that disagree with you, but unfortunately we’re sticking around.

    You made one — ONE — factual claim in all that blather: “You say look at the prison scandal in Iraq but never say look at what these people are doing.”

    I assume you refer to “these people” as the detained Iraqis. No, actually we’ve looked at who “these people” are and noted that a number of them are not involved in insurgency or terrorism in the first place. Yet they were tortured by Americans anyway. As our soon-to-be Attorney General would put it, how “quaint.”

  5. Patricia says:

    I just love how these Republicans come here and call Irregular Times hateful because Irregular Times criticizes torture. That’s the Republican world view for you.

  6. Matt D. says:

    There were actually 2 factual statements in all that blather. The 2nd was, Always time will tell. Indeed, time will tell. Time will show that by pandering to fear and bigotry, the Republicans have done incomprehensible damage to the cultural and political life of America.

    A couple of specific rejoinders:

    Republicans say Democrats want to raise taxes until the rich are poor and the poor are rich, crush free enterprise, attack and destroy the moral foundation of the country, and knuckle under to terrorists so that they can enslave us all…And yet it’s the Democrats who are spreading paranoia?

    The Democrats are the party of lies and deceit? In reply to that claim, let me just say a few words: Watergate. Iran-Contra. Read my lips: no new taxes. Weapons of mass destruction.

    The Democrats are the party of no morals whatsoever, you say. Well, morality is in the eye of the beholder, apparently. Personally I tend to think of morality in terms of the following:

    “So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.”

    “Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.”

    “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.”

  7. J S says:

    1) How does anyone know that is indeed an Iraqi?
    2) Are we to understand that this is to in some way imply that this individual is being mistreated in any way? Looks more like he is being physically restrainded.
    3) Other than posting pictures of a prisoner, I don’t see a news story other than a lame attempt to twist the facts for political purpose.

  8. Kevin says:

    I agree with J S. There is absolutely no news whatsoever in that picture. Plus, look at the guy. He is not straining whatsoever, even though his position would indicate he is restraining someone.

    Plus, who is the Iraqi (If he is indeed an Iraqi)? Is he an insurgent who, only minutes earlier, was firing on the guys in the picture?

    And HareTrinity: As far as being in Texas somehow equating with a lack of intelligence or common sense, I’ll put my academic accomplishments and intellect next to yours any day of the week.

  9. Matt D. says:

    Here is your story.

    If I read the article correctly, the detainees in the pictures are civilians. It’s probably completely useless even to write this, however, since as we all know any Iraqi is a potentially armed terrorist who poses an immense threat to U.S. forces until being subdued, partially or completed stripped, hooded, handcuffed, beaten, possibly forced to simulate oral sex on another prisoner, and photographed as a war trophy.

    But I digress. Perhaps the picture attached to the original posting was not the best choice to demonstrate the point. Better choices are on the News Leader site linked at the top of this comment. In any case, the original photo is apparently evidence in a(nother) criminal investigation of prisoner abuse by American soldiers. That, I think, is a news story.

  10. George Luce says:

    I can’t believe the majority of people are ignorant or refuse to believe what were doing is right. The insurgents or radicals in the Middle East hate us. The majority of the people just want a good life for their family. Let’s continue to allow psychos run those countries. The Democrats to me are very similar to the politicians in France. We now know that the French were in bed with Iraq and taking all kinds of money to stay silent and supply them with weapons they used on us.

    Israel, what about it, they are surrounded by hate for them, they defend themselves and do it well. Why haven’t other Arab countries helped the people of Palestine find a home? Why are the people of that part of the world so barbaric? Why haven’t they progressed further from where they are now? We need to help establish a free society with all the privileges and respect individuals deserve. They need to be freed from the narrow minded thinking of these religious fanatics.

    I can say that where they are in the extreme, religiously speaking, we in the USA are on the opposite end. We are on the extreme of no religious values. The democrats represent that side of this country too.

    Most of the people involved in terrorism are uneducated, poor and are looking to belong to something. The leaders of terrorism are in tune with this. They lie and manipulate and they convince these people to blow themselves up, would you? I equate terrorist with skinheads, same mentality. Should we let the skinheads do what they want? I bet you all hate the skinheads.

    Lies and more Lies are what come from the Democrats. Not to say the same doesn’t happen in the Republican sector but when you weigh the two sides it is definitely tilted on the end of the Democrats. No values, lack or morals, more government and believe me they are not for the little guy. Democrats are for control.

    I don’t care about weapons of mass destruction. The guy had to go regardless. It is a matter of survival in the long term for the USA. Yes it is all about the USA. We are a very generous nation and we should continue to be so, but bottom line is what is best for our survival. I am not concerned with France and Germany and the like. They made their beds.

    As for these insurgents, I could care less what we do to them. They could care less what they do to us. Maybe we should start chopping heads, an eye for an eye mentality. No it’s not humane. Making a bunch of guys run around naked is so inhumane. Where are your priorities?

    So in the end we will never agree, because the Democrats and their supporters are people who fall into a group of categories. For the most part these are the people that the democrats try to recruit. The poor, students, minorities, artist and the like are the types who become democrats, until they get sick and tired of supporting people who don’t want to contribute to their own success. Why because they are easy targets, they can be lied to and manipulated, initially.

    Republicans are for the people. They say you can make it on your own and be successful. We’ll help you but we are not going to support you. Democracy isn’t about supporting people so they don’t have to make it on their own steam. It’s about creating a great people, which we have, thinkers. Not bums, who say help every time you turn around. Democrats want reliance on government this is called control. They want you to lose your ability to make it on your own.

    Well I’ve changed the subject but it’s all the same. It’s about freedom and being an individual. Not relying on some one to take care of you. That’s what is going on in this war. We are relying on ourselves to take care of what needs to be done for the survival of this country and our children. These people that we are fighting are animals to the core. The leader of the terrorist in Iraq is a convicted child molester and criminal. He’s in it for the power he hopes to attain.

    So you people keep supporting people like Kerry, Clinton and Kennedy three great examples to emulate. In the end leave it to true leadership to guide this country through the storm, because it sure isn’t coming from the Democrats.

  11. Matt D. says:

    You’re right. We’ll never agree. I will never understand the Republican version of freedom, where freedom of religion means the right to be a Christian, freedom of speech means the right to agree with the Bush administration or sit down and shut up, and freedom of assembly means the right to gather for the opportunity to cheer and applaud every time George W. Bush utters a platitude about compassionate conservatism. Freedom to choose one thing is not freedom at all.

    You completely misunderstand what Democrats are about. There’s no convincing you, so I guess I won’t even bother. There is an editorial that I think explains it incredibly well, but of course you will think it’s all a bunch of claptrap.

  12. Kevin says:

    Matt: ‘True’ Republicans value your right to disagree with their platform as much as they cherish their right to disseminate it.

    Sure, I would love it if everyone in the world agreed with my point of view; but since that isn’t happening, I’m happy just to be able to say what I want and not worry about being killed or thrown in jail because of it.

    A lot of people on this site and others speak of the “imminent” repression of freedom of speech and choice. I ask all of you: Since when has someone shown up at your door and given you a ticket for presenting your views? Has anyone you know been thrown in prison for disagreeing (peacefully) with the situation our country is in? Please, if you have names I would like to know.

    Otherwise, all you Doomesday Prophets, keep cowering under your fear of someting that has as much likelihood as a Milli Vanilli reunion.

  13. J. Matthew says:

    Kevin, I believe you owe Irregular Times an apology for your wild accusations on another item. Please provide that apology.

    As for being arrested for disagreeing with Bush:


    Maybe You’ll Believe It If A Conservative Says It, ’cause Lord Knows the rest of us are making things up to make you look stupid…

  14. Kevin says:

    Link #1: Refused to go to a DESIGNATED protest area= TRESPASSING
    Link #2: Disorderly Conduct. That’s a misdemeanor.
    Link #3: See link #1
    Link #4: Tresspassing on private property

    Look, you have two choices if you have the balls to protest: Either do what the cops say, or get arrested. I don’t like driving 60 mph on the highway; hell, I’d love to drive twice that speed. But rules are for the safety of others, J. Matthew.

    And no. I won’t apologize. Remember, Freedom Of Speech, right?

  15. Kevin says:

    J. Matthew: Another reason why I will not apologize. Go look at some of my prior apologies and the posts proceding them. Go ahead. I tried to have a little class, but some just don’t give a shit. So there.

  16. Matt D. says:

    Interesting that you never commented on the American Conservative link, kevin. In case you didn’t read the article, it ends as follows:

    Is the administration seeking to stifle domestic criticism? Absolutely. Is it carrying out a war on dissent? Probably not—yet. But the trend lines in federal attacks on freedom of speech should raise grave concerns to anyone worried about the First Amendment or about how a future liberal Democratic president such as Hillary Clinton might exploit the precedents that Bush is setting.

    BTW, I never suggested that the thought police were on my doorstep. Of course the administration cannot legally imprison people simply for speaking their minds. But they can mess around with trespassing ordinances or bully protesters, they can portray dissenters as traitors, and they can create an atmosphere in which it is unpopular and/or irrelevant to disagree. I don’t think the result is all that different.

    And forgive me if I’m being obtuse, but can you explain how this is the kind of policy you would come up with if you value your fellow citizen’s right to disagree and dissent? Are these the “true” or “fake” Republicans who are so intolerant of opposition that they’ll kill legislation – presumably even if it’s legislation they or the president agree with – just because it’s supported mostly by Democrats?

  17. Patricia says:

    This is amazing! Don’t these guys read?!? Don’t they know that in this same set of pictures, there are images of bloody prisoners being hit, and guns being held to their heads?!?

    Why are the Republicans these days so enthusiastic for torture?!?

  18. J. Matthew says:

    They weren’t trespassing in #1 and #3 — it was public property.

    You won’t apologize for falsely accusing us of faking photos? Fine.

    You won’t then be surprised if I cease to treat you as a serious individual. That’s my choice.

    1. J Clifford says:

      This incident is an important reminder that fake news is not a new tactic for Republicans.

      Who would have dreamed in 2004 that 13 years later, we would STILL have American soldiers in Iraq, under a torture-loving Republican President who argues that escalating the war there will solve the problem?

  19. Kevin says:

    I didn’t want to have to do this, J. Matthew, but since you won’t take ME seriously (which I could care less if you do), maybe you’ll take THESE beacons of free speech seriously, all of which are FULLY operational as of this writing:
    1) The Houston Chronicle
    2) New York Times
    3) Washington Post
    4) Austin-American Statesman
    5) Los Angeles Times
    6) Irregular Times
    7) Move On!
    8) Michael Moore
    9) The tour with Springsteen, Pearl Jam, et al.– not exactly a pep rally for Bush!
    10) Susan Sarandon
    11) Alec Baldwin
    12) Al Franken
    13) Radio America
    14) National Enquirer
    15) Weekly World News
    16) The American Communist Party
    17) NBC, CBS, ABC, FOX, CNN, MSNBC, etc.
    18) Vivid Video or any other porno movie company
    19) The Church Of Satan headed by Anton LaVey
    20) November 2, 2004– 52+million protested against GWB

    I could go on all day, but I think you get the point.

    Now, Chicken Little, is the sky still falling?

  20. Kevin says:

    Matt D: I say, read the above post as to why I didn’t respond. I’ll call you Chicken Pequito.

  21. J. Matthew Cook says:

    Kevin, you’re changing your standard. You asked us to identify whether anyone has been arrested for expressing their views. I surpassed your standard by providing four examples. Don’t shift the line.

    If we’re Chicken Littles on torture, which is your ORIGINAL allegation, what explains today’s article in the Washington Post?

    Why do you keep justifying torture?

  22. Matt D. says:

    See also

    And also

    N.B. I do not mean to imply that we have already been stripped of our right of free speech or free press, or that we ever will be. I merely intend to point out further examples of those who wish we could be. Will they succeed or fail? I cannot say. However, given the number of conservatives on this progressive-leaning site alone who argue, for example, that we should happily give up our niggling preconceptions that torture is a bad thing in order to protect our freedom, I am not willing to bet my future social security benefits (ha! I made a funny!) that they will fail.

    In any case, my original point was NOT that we don’t have the right to free speech. My original point was that the Republican concept of freedom seems to be the freedom to toe the Republican party line. Examples abound. See above.

  23. Lars says:

    Was ANYONE arrested for speaking their views? YES, hundreds, if not thousands, were, by the Republican mayor of New York City during the Republican National Convention! They weren’t charged with anything – just conveniently held in jail for doing nothing but protesting.

    Kevin is at it justifying torture AGAIN, saying that it’s no big deal!

    So, are we supposed to believe that the torture in Abu Ghraib is no big deal?
    …and then that the torture elsewhere in Iraq is no big deal?
    …and that the documented widespread torture by Americans across Afghanistan is no big deal?
    …and that the ongoing, approved, Bush-mandated torture in Guantanamo Bay is no big deal?
    …and the torture of non-terrorist, non-criminal foreigners in Homeland Security prisons in New Jersey is no big deal?

    Kevin suggest that it’s no big deal, that the torture is just a few isolated incidents, but in fact the torture has been shown to be widespread. Didn’t he hear that yet another group of torture incidents in Iraq, outside of Abu Ghraib, has been uncovered?

    Does he think that complaining about incidents like the Americans capturing the children of prisoners, stripping the children naked, caking them with mud, and parading them in front of their parents IS BEING CHICKEN LITTLE?!?!?!

    Kevin, you’re a sicko.

    The torture is not just pervasive in Iraq. It’s a worldwide phenomenon – wherever the Americans are, stories of torture are popping up.

    The Republican Congress voted just recently to include language in a bill that would make sending prisoners on American soil to foreign countries that can torture them A LEGAL THING FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO DO!

    Where is Kevin’s sense of outrage?!? Oh, he complains about pointy-headed liberals. He complains about anti-war protesters not waving the flag enough. But will he lift one finger to stop the torture being committed by his own political party? NO!

    He calls people who complain about torture CHICKEN LITTLES! Yet, even just the stories reported here on Irregular Times, which are but a small chunk of what’s been documented to be going on, shows a disgusting pattern of a sadistic government out of control.

    I guess Kevin thinks that’s no big deal. Kevin seems to think that complaining about torture is a bigger problem than the torture itself.

  24. Matt D. says:

    Kevin also refuses to apologize on this site when he is wrong, because he did that one time and someone told him to “piss off.” He writes “if I stick my neck out, there’s a chance it will get cut off.”

    So you would think he would understand that actual arrests would serve to curtail protest, as they are intended to do. He won’t even say “I’m sorry,” for fear that someone will say “piss off.” But we are just being cowards if we don’t exercise our freely available right to protest, also known as lining up in the “free speech zone” to be arrested and harassed.

  25. Kevin says:

    All of you who accuse me (falsely) of approving of torture need to read my post under the “Systematic Torture Revealed” post. After actually reading my position on torture– which was NEVER stated on this thread–I was speaking on freedom of speech, not torture– get back with me. Let me know if you STILL think I’m pro-torture.

    Please, people, if you’re going to accuse me of something, at least have the decency to prove it with fact. Read my post in the aforemetioned thread. Go for it.

    No apologies will be necessary. Knowing you realize your mistake in judgement will be satisfaction enough. Cheers!

  26. Kevin says:

    So Lars, please let me know when and where you are going on vacation. I don’t want to be anywhere near you…
    “wherever the Americans are, stories of torture are popping up.”

  27. HareTrinity says:

    Hey, Kevin, I’ve got a great idea!

    How about, instead of repeatedly saying that you don’t APPROVE of torture, why don’t you say something AGAINST torture, and admit that it’s WRONG for your government to use it on purpose?

    Y’know… Instead of just whining about assumptions people are making, and never actually stating your own views outside of why you don’t like our arguments… It’s a little suspicious in itself…

  28. Laura says:

    Aha. This has been quite a joy reading these blogs. Of course, no one is being held in jail for unjustifiable reasons, NOW THAT WE HAVE THE PATRIOT ACT! My sociology teacher said that people were held for years without any justice.
    What is George Bush trying to get at? He’s pro-life, yet he supports mass killings of innocent civilians in Iraq… oh wait, nevermind Iraqis aren’t people, only Americans matter. The American soldiers who don’t even know what they’re fighting for. SUVs? Oh, and Bush is ALSO very pro-death penalty setting the record for most people waiting on death row and most people prosecuted on death row. Save the incestial babies until they grow up to be criminals, then you can kill them. And buy all the weapons you want, too.
    While everyone (except Bush) despairs over dead American soldiers, a whole bunch of civilians die and no one knows about this, why?
    What about all the job losses???? The economy is crumbling along with the environment. People need to read the numbers instead of the bible for once.
    There seems to be a connection between Kevin and Bush: the inability to admit their mistake(s). Anyone remember the incredible presidential debates? Or was only half of America watching? Remember, I don’t recall which one it was, but some lady in the audience asked Bush to identify three mistakes he had made in the last four years. Bush, of course, avoided this question like many others and neglected to name at least one.

    National day of mourning: January 5, 2005.

  29. Benny says:

    The “Economist” link you posted as a reference that this guy was being arrested for speaking against Bush, really said this:
    “The veteran protester was arrested last October for trespassing at the Columbia Metropolitan Airport ”
    Please be accurate in your claims

  30. Matt D. says:

    And Al Capone was indicted for tax evasion. What else WOULD they charge the protestor with? Free speech?

    Here is another snippet from that article:

    [I]t is extremely hard to see why Mr Thurmond has picked on Mr Bursey out of all the people in the Secret Service zone. None of the other protesters with him was arrested. Neither were any of the several hundred supporters of the president who were holding equally dangerous (but pro-Bush) signs as they stood near the hangar where the president was to speak.

  31. Thomas says:

    Matt, what a dopey comment. I’m suprised that that is the best you can offer. A protestor could be charged with disorderly conduct, inciting a riot, malicious mischief, vandalism, or many many others.

    He was apparently not protesting where it was allowed to be and therefore trespassing is the charge. Why do you support breaking the laws of this country? Good progressiveness.

  32. Vincent Bemowski says:


    Many Democrats are very judgmental about the actions of President Bush because they fail to take a close look at the lies and deceitful actions of those in their own Party. For example:

    In the Presidential debate of Oct. 22, 1976 between President Ford and Jimmy Carter, Carter stated that he did not favor a constitutional amendment to outlaw abortion, and he would only work within the confines of the Supreme Court ruling to minimize the NEED for abortions. That is like saying, “I’m against slavery, but I will not work to change an unjust law, lets just work to reduce the NUMBER of slaves.” Republicans support a Human Life Amendment to our Constitution – Democrats do not. Abortion would already be outlawed in the USA if it were not for the Democratic Party.

    From a speech by President Johnson, Oct. 21, 1964, at Akron University, Ohio: “We are not about to send American boys 9 or 10,000 miles away from home to do what Asian boys ought to be doing for themselves.” In 1968, Johnson’s last full year as President, there were over 500,000 American soldiers in Vietnam. During Johnson’s Presidency, over 30,000 American soldiers died in the Vietnam War. In addition, by the end of 1968, millions of South Vietnamese civilians were left homeless, and over 180,000 North Vietnamese civilians had been killed.

    January 26, 1998: In the presence of First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton, and Vice President Al Gore in the Roosevelt Room of the White House, President Clinton stated: “But I want to say one thing to the American people. I want you to listen to me. I’m going to say this again: I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky. I never told anybody to lie, not a single time — never. These allegations are false.” We know that Clinton not only lied with this statement, but a number of times before he admitted his guilt. The evidence of Clinton’s lack of wisdom is also shown in his pro-abortion beliefs, and his approval of homosexual lifestyles.

    In addition, for 1992’s Hurricane Andrew, a Category 5 storm, federal help for Florida did not arrive until the 4th day after the hurricane. Clinton never assumed responsibility for this late action by his administration.

    Vincent Bemowski

  33. Peregrin Wood says:


    Your comment is far off topic, but I’ll bite by responding.

    Do you support the legislation now in Congress to make torture illegal or do you not? Do you oppose the Bush Administration’s efforts to kill that legislation or do you not?

    You’re reaching back into the last century to try to make some kind of general point about Democrats – as if that’s what matters.

    Address the topic of torture by the Americans in Iraq, or buzz off.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Psst... what kind of person doesn't support pacifism?

Fight the Republican beast!