Talk:Abu Ghraib prison/Archive 1

message: #Copyright status: "courtesy of Daily Mirror" -- seems to that imply permission was sought and granted. Is that the case?
#Relevance to this article: this incident didn't take place at Abu Ghraib. Maybe it's time to address the overlap of this article with Human rights situation in post-Saddam Iraq
–Hajor 18:01, 1 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Daily Mirror photos

message: I want to congratulate everybody on maintaining a civil tone during all of these discussions.  RickK 20:10, 1 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Civil discussion

message: I've removed this link. It duplicates the images we already have but also has some images which are completely unrelated to Abu Ghraib. They depict a rape scene, but to me they look staged - even if they aren't, there's no source information and it has nothing to do with this article.--Eloquence* 23:31, May 1, 2004 (UTC)
I thought this link was appropriate. Very questionable, but that's what external links are for, questioning. The rape may be out of context but the last two show more believable photos of naked prisoners being led around outdoors somewhere, possibly unrelated to Abu Ghraib, but possibly related to the significance of this story (U.S. war crimes in Iraq.) Plus it  seems to be the only non-western site linked, and I've always found Arabic media (while lacking the NPOV) of interest in getting a better understanding of the situation. I think this link should be kept, with a disclaimer of it's questionable nature. If nothing else it's an example of anti-U.S. propoganda, that the rape images are included with only "these pictures were e-mailed to albasrah" as a source. Very telling of what the Abu Ghraib incident has done for US/Iraqi relations to say the least. Links need not necessarily be NPOV... --PJV 17:05, May 2, 2004 (UTC)
:That link does not improve this particular article. Instead, start an article on Albasrah.net. Write about the origin of the site, its evolution, and describe its content. Kingturtle 17:22, 2 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  Some of the pictures on the al-Basra.net website have apparently been taken from porn sites depicting forced sex with Iraqi women in a war situation, as described in this  article  -  so thanks for removing it, and sorry for putting the ink in the first place without checking it more thoroughly. I don't know abything much about the al-Basra website itself. (still, given the trade of pictures of abuse among soldiers, it doesn't seem totally impossible that they are genuine ; and the al-Basra website may not have acted in bad faith.) pir 09:14, 10 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questionable link removed 

message: If they were both "detained and demoted," then why is it wrong to include their names in this article? Kingturtle 21:41, 2 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Presumption of innocence? If some angry vigilante goes and throws a molotov cocktail through the female PFC's parents' kitchen window tonight, do you want him to be able to say he tracked the address down through www.wikipedia.org? I'd rather let the New Yorker (or any of the other hundred press sources out there) take the rap. I see I was reverted PDQ after deleting the names. Whatever, as the kids say. But if we're going to name those two, then in the interests of balance we have to name the other five (per the NYorker) who are under investigation. –Hajor 23:16, 2 May 2004 (UTC)

text: Sublime Sovereign of the Chelonians, whatever else I was doing in my previous message, I certainly wasn't playing the blame game about who reverted. My point about discretion in naming names has been made – and if it fell on deaf ears, then that was probably because of the USA's extraordinary openness about such information, compared to the countries I'm more familiar with. A matter of different cultural perceptions. More deponent sayeth not (other than pointing out (again) that if we're going to name two, then we should name seven). I'm cool. –Hajor 23:37, 2 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  names 

message: OK, this has been changed from Abu Ghraib to Abu Grahib.  Is the move wrong?  RickK 22:37, 2 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Title