Sensationalism. That's what it's all aboot.
Of course, Obama doesn't approve of these things. Do you? Does anyone here? If so, keep it to yourself, unless you want to get flamed.
What is being done here is linking element A with element B thru element C. And the article does not reach the conclusion presented in this thread's title. The journalist only states that traditional media are being silent about the affair. Do not jump to conclusions.
For example:
Obama likes cats.
Terrorists like cats.
Herego, Obama is a terrorist.
This argument makes as much sense as the one in the article. Gotta love sophistry.
I'm not saying not releasing the photos is a good or bad thing, nor am I disputing that abuse such as that described might have taken place, I'm just exposing the fallacy of the logic behind the journalists' argumentation. If crime was committed, then I hope sanctions are enacted against them, appropriate to the crimes, but there is no need for the public to see such photos.
Also, have you noted the 'conspiracy tone' behind the entire page (and not just the article)? It would not surprise me that 'prisonplanet' be a biased media outlet - but then aren't they all nowadays?
|