W.H. 'Disappointed' L.A. Times Published Photos 'Two Years After the Incident'

[qrayjack]

By DANIEL HALPER

White House spokesman Jay Carney reacted to the publication of photos in the Los Angeles Times of U.S. soldiers posing with corpses in Afghanistan by saying the Obama administration is "disappointed.. [with] the decision to publish two years after the incident," according to a pool report.

Carney is suggesting, it would seem, that the photos might put at risk U.S. soldiers fighting the war in Afghanistan. And that, since the photos were taken two years ago, there would not seem to be pressing need for the Los Angeles Times to publish the photos while the soldiers are in that war theater.

Carney also blasted the photos themselves--at least, the actions of those American in the pictures. "[The] conduct depicted in those photographs is reprehensible and does not in any way represent the high standards of the US military," Carney told the press aboard Air Force One. "And the president certainly shares in the defense secretary's opinion that this should be investigated and those held responsible will be held accountable."

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/wh-disappointed-la-times-published-photos-two-years-after-incident_640402.html

So this might endanger the troops? Well gee Carney, you leftists weren't concerned about that when you screamed for weeks on end about Abu Ghraib with your mainstream media buddies plastering the pictures all over the world.

[Warhawk1982]

Soooo...in an election year he actually "cares" about our soldiers. He is ridiculous.

[politicalboy]

This is something American soldiers have done in virtually every war since the advent of photography. My dad had a shoe box full of dead japanese photographed in Okinawa. Is it questionable, probably. Putting ourselves in thier shoes though, living that life day in and day out. We may well be taking a few snap shots. Wesley Clark, again needs to just shut up. This is being blown way out of proportion. I don't recall anyone ever telling me war was about anything but ugly. That is why they call it the sum of all evils.

[lightnin']

...I'm so damned sick of the Obama & his stooges; each of whom despise our military (except when they're used as a campaign prop), try to define their "values".

Here's a clue, Jay-our soldiers and contractors were "at risk" from the day in 2001/'02 they were dropped into that Hellhole following the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon.

Grayjack-you nailed it; these are the same whiney wusses who trashed our military in '06-'07 following Abu Ghraib. Of course, we all know it was with the intent of destroying President Bush; our military was simply "collateral damage" to these folks.

[qrayjack]

Burning issues of the left are ideologically driven and politically expedient to the point of incoherence. In their smug, self-superior world, hypocrisy and double standard doesn't apply to them.

[UB_S]

Originally Posted by lightnin'

...Of course, we all know it was with the intent of destroying President Bush; our military was simply "collateral damage" to these folks.

Originally Posted by qrayjack

... hypocrisy and double standard doesn't apply to them.

Amen!

[historycat]

yeah right! These dead terrorists, whom none of which had any respect for their own D*** bodies to begin with, much less anyone elses, who straped bombs to themselves and blew themselves up, trying to kill others, all the sudden become relevant, and important, when re-election becons on the horizon. BS!
And Our soldiers did nothing wrong!

[Warhawk1982]

Originally Posted by lightnin'

...I'm so damned sick of the Obama & his stooges; each of whom despise our military (except when they're used as a campaign prop), try to define their "values".

I've always hated that. bill clinton did that too. He couldn't have cared less when the Cole was bombed. He also never saluted his Marine guards when exiting and entering Marine One.