Would you like to see the photos?

[Miles Teg]

And the clerics were saying a burial at sea wasn't appropriate (when it clearly was).

I honestly have no clue as to whether or not Bin Laden's burial at sea followed proper protocol, but I love the fact that you've educated yourself in Islamic funeral rites quickly enough to off-handedly dismiss members of the actual clergy of the Islamic faith when they say that Bin Laden's funeral didn't follow the customs of their own culture.

 

[Disgustipated]

I honestly have no clue as to whether or not Bin Laden's burial at sea followed proper protocol, but I love the fact that you've educated yourself in Islamic funeral rites quickly enough to off-handedly dismiss members of the actual clergy of the Islamic faith when they say that Bin Laden's funeral didn't follow the customs of their own culture.

Thank you. From all that I read, it was the only option. They had to get him buried in 24 hours, and no one else wanted to do it, so...

I just had a wicked thought in my head. What if they had buried him in the U.S. Even funnier would be if they buried him at Arlington National Cemetery.

 

[Miles Teg]

Thank you. From all that I read, it was the only option. They had to get him buried in 24 hours, and no one else wanted to do it, so...

Oh, I see, you read some things about how Muslims prefer to bury their dead. That makes sense. I presume that the clergy who are apparently criticizing Bin Laden's burial never read things. Or at least they never read things on the internet, from which all accurate information flows. It's very important to read things on the internet in order to understand one's own culture, and the religion one has spent a lifetime studying. I generally find it's best to just dismiss the experts on these things.

 

[Disgustipated]

Sometimes experts have an agenda that prevents them from being impartial or factual.

 

[Disgustipated]

http://gawker.com/?_escaped_fragmen...d-be-forced-to-release-the-osama-death-photos

This is an interesting article, I'm not sure how accurate it is, I'm not familiar with the site. It basically says eventually Obama may have to release the pictures under the freedom of information act. His only alternative to not releasing them is to prove they are classified (which is possible) or to try to defend Osama Bin Ladin's family privacy (unlikely).

Under the FOIA, government agencies—but not the White House itself—can be compelled to turn over any document, photo, video, or other record as long as there's no statutory reason for withholding it. Obama faces two obstacles to keeping the bin Laden photos secret: 1) Since it was (presumably) taken by a Navy SEAL working on a joint mission of the CIA and Department of Defense's Joint Special Operations Command, it was originated by a federal agency subject to the FOIA and 2) There doesn't appear to be a good reason under the FOIA not to disclose it.

As far as photos of the corpse go," said Kel McClanahan, the executive director of National Security Counselors, a law firm specializing in litigating secrecy issues, "there's nothing I can reasonably think of that would exempt that, unless someone classified them." The government could conceivably try to deny a FOIA request for the photos based on the statute's privacy exemptions, but that would put it in the awkward position of going to court to protect Osama bin Laden's surviving family members' privacy.

So classification is the best bet. Trouble is, you can't simply classify things because you don't want them released. There has to be a reason. And according to Metcalfe, it's hard to imagine a good reason to classify a simple photograph of bin Laden's corpse.

 

[NetGear]

This is America. We should let capitalism determine the outcome.

19.99 pay per view. 29.99 for funeral video package.

 

[Ramius75]

This is America. We should let capitalism determine the outcome.

19.99 pay per view. 29.99 for funeral video package.

Aye. and sue anyone who tries to share the video.

 

[Smellincoffee]

If there's no evidence at all, it seems a little weird. I understand their motivations as explained, but some part of me can imagine them shooting him with a tranquilizer, throwing him in a military bodybag, then taking him to some black site somewhere to torture him. It would make a suitable Dan Brown novel, anyway.

 

[LucyDuke]

Do I want to see them? No, I don't like looking at that sort of thing.

Should they be released? That's a separate question. I voted according to the question asked.

Ideally, I'd like the President to show them to various members of Congress, Republican and Democrat, so they can go to their districts and argue conspiracy people though. I think, without publishing them, that would be a good compromise.

If I were opposed to the wide release, I would agree with this.

Jon Stewart made a pretty good case for the release, basically that hiding the gore is hiding the war. It's not as easy to support violence if you actually have to look at it.

Second segment, around 6:30, meat of the argument starts around 9:10.

I buy it. Release the photos. Release all the photos, not just the ones where we won.

 

[amadeus]

Jon Stewart made a pretty good case for the release, basically that hiding the gore is hiding the war. It's not as easy to support violence if you actually have to look at it.

It should be pretty easy to support violence against Osama bin Laden, no matter how gory or gruesome. If anyone is so sensitive to violence that they change their opinion on the war, why did they not feel the same way about photos of the attack against the World Trade Center or the Pentagon?

 

[azzaman333]

No thanks, I don't swing that way.

 

[IglooDame]

Do I want to see the photos? No. Hearing that OBL took one to the head and one to the chest and is dead is enough description for me.

Do I want the photos to be released? Not really. Clearly the conspiracy theorists (both inside the US and worldwide) and people disinclined to believe the statements of the US government will not be swayed by what they'll claim (probably correctly) are very good fakes. And the more important element, independent fact-finding, is also likely a waste because I really wouldn't trust anyone's word regarding analysis of the photos to determine if they're fakes or not anyway - too much bias combined with not enough capability for independent verification. It's not like OBL is a national leader that has been photographed thousands of times.

 

[rugbyLEAGUEfan]

Let's assume that the pictures are not being released due to their gruesome nature and for other reasons mentioned in this thread.

But on the basis that the Prez watched the raid live , it follows that there is footage of a NavySEAL storming in with a stunned Osama staring down the barrel like a deer in headlights , but still alive

Why is this footage not able to be released ?

 

[Monsterzuma]

i really don't think it's a luxury to ask for something more than "take our word on it". there currently isn't... anything... in the way of evidence of the events really happening the way they were told to be.

 

[Fuzzz]

He's keeping the pics till election season.

 

[SuperJay]

I don't have a particularly strong desire to see the photos, myself.

And I agree with the Republican chairman of the House Intelligence committee - the risks of releasing the photos outweigh the benefits.

 

[Cheetah]

I want some further proof than just "because we say so".

If the pictures is the only thing they got, then yes, I want to see the pictures.

 

[EnglishEdward]

If there's no evidence at all, it seems a little weird. I understand their motivations as explained, but some part of me can imagine them shooting him with a tranquilizer, throwing him in a military bodybag, then taking him to some black site somewhere to torture him.

Perhaps that is exactly what actually happened, but the US government
want Bon Laden's associates to think that he is dead so that they won't
change their hiding places and can be caught when Bin Laden cracks.

 

[Miles Teg]

Jon Stewart made a pretty good case for the release, basically that hiding the gore is hiding the war. It's not as easy to support violence if you actually have to look at it.

I agree with the general rule that we shouldn't hide the goriness of war, but I'm not sure that this applies in this situation. Bin Laden wasn't an anonymous soldier, he was a publicly reviled leader. The only identifying photo of Bin Laden features prominent blood and splattered brains. I'm inclined to agree that a large portion of the population would see it as a trophy of sorts. That group includes people like Sarah Palin (the poor dear probably doesn't understand the difference between a terrorist leader and a moose) and sections of the Arab World that are sympathetic to Al Qaeda.

 

[Bill3000]

It should be pretty easy to support violence against Osama bin Laden, no matter how gory or gruesome. If anyone is so sensitive to violence that they change their opinion on the war, why did they not feel the same way about photos of the attack against the World Trade Center or the Pentagon?

Eh, you tended to not see gory bodies in pictures of the attacks; just the buildings being damaged/crashing.