Releasing the Osama kill photo

[Alan]

It took me a while to notice that, given the rest of the picture.

What were they doing with a squirt gun??

What do you think?

 

[BenBurch]

It took me a while to notice that, given the rest of the picture.

What were they doing with a squirt gun??

Hot sauce? (I'm serious.)

 

[Normal Dude]

It took me a while to notice that, given the rest of the picture.

What were they doing with a squirt gun??

There were kids in the compound, no? The thing was probably just lying there the whole time.

 

[gumboot]

It would be wrong (and indeed illegal) for the US Government to release the photographs. The use of images of either POWs or war-dead is generally prohibited by the Laws of International Armed Conflict.

And that's not just my opinion, by the opinion of a Legal expert in the Laws of War.

 

[Kid Eager]

I say don't release them - the window of opportunity for that has already passed.

Any photo released now will just be disregarded as a Photoshop jobbie, "because they needed a couple of days to doctor something up". Everybody knows that the NWO is brilliant enough to run the world, but can't plan a Photoshop job...

They're damned if they do and damned if they don't. At least with the photos not released there's no additional motivation for any other bunches of crazies to use it as a basis to feign some other form of righteous indignation.

 

[Lothian]

Don't realease them. We need a simple means of spotting the stupid people.

 

[000063]

Has been confirmed it won't be released (pardon if a repeat). Let the whining begin

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/05/04/concerns-mount-potential-backlash-ubl-photo-release/

Quote from Obama: ""We don't trot out this stuff as trophies. ... We don't need to spike the football"

Hey somebody gets it.

Over at ATS, they promptly started whining about how The American People deserve to ID his body, Islamic custom and respect for America's enemies be hanged. Americans > foreigners, in their eyes, and they refuse to accept that anyone could think differently, as is standard for Truthers.

 

[000063]

My underlining.
Beginning to see the double standard?

What evidence has been presented that he is dead?

The same DNA test that has been performed a ton of times, even holding up in court in the case of Saddam.

What evidence is there that this test was different? Without that evidence, all you have is a double standard.

 

[Dave Rogers]

It would be wrong (and indeed illegal) for the US Government to release the photographs. The use of images of either POWs or war-dead is generally prohibited by the Laws of International Armed Conflict.

And that's not just my opinion, by the opinion of a Legal expert in the Laws of War.

The tricky question, of course, is whether Osama Bin Laden was, as this opinion claims, "A lawful military target during a time of armed conflict". Since he was on nominally friendly soil, not bearing arms, and not wearing the uniform of a combatant, I'd be interested to know exactly how that claim is justified. Having said that, it appears to me entirely correct that the photographs should not be released; it's clearly in line with what international law there is available to apply to this rather unusual situation.

Dave

 

[WildCat]

Not if they classify it.

There has to be a legitimate reason for classifying it. "We don't want anyone to see them" won't make the cut.

 

[BenBurch]

There has to be a legitimate reason for classifying it. "We don't want anyone to see them" won't make the cut.

"May complicate active operations."

 

[Pardalis]

I want in on that action.

Let's bet you'll claim they were faked.

 

[BenBurch]

Let's bet you'll claim they were faked.

Not fair. That was an obvious prediction.

 

[Checkmite]

Releasing the photos will accomplish nothing. Those who argue they're necessary to "convince people it really happened" are either being dishonest or have forgotten about the mountains of photographic evidence for the Apollo landings.

 

[WildCat]

"May complicate active operations."

That was their claim for the Afghanistan murder investigation photos, the courts said not good enough. Those only got suppressed because Congress passed a law preventing their release, I doubt Congress would do the same for OBL's pic.

 

[gumboot]

The tricky question, of course, is whether Osama Bin Laden was, as this opinion claims, "A lawful military target during a time of armed conflict". Since he was on nominally friendly soil, not bearing arms, and not wearing the uniform of a combatant, I'd be interested to know exactly how that claim is justified.

Well this is another interesting point. If you argue that Osama Bin Laden was a criminal rather than a combatant, the entire raid was an act of state-sanctioned murder, in which case the photographs should probably be seized by the FBI as evidence of the crime, and put into exhibit in the trial of Obama and others.

For what it's worth the Laws of War have been upgraded somewhat since WW2 and uniform is no longer a requirement. The carrying of arms openly only applies when armed, of course, but unarmed combatants can still be shot. I think a pretty solid case can be made that the Afghanistan War has expanded into Pakistan.

So either you go the Bush/Clinton route, argue they're "non combatants"/"criminals" in which case the US government murdered OBL and would be stupid to release evidence of their crimes

OR

You go the current US policy route that Al Qaeda etc. members are combatants in a war in which case the hit on OBL was totally legal, but his corpse is protected under the Geneva and Hague Conventions and releasing photos would constitute a war crime.

Either way the only sensible action is to not release the photographs. And that's without having to speculate on what the consequences of releasing or not releasing the images might be as per the Muslim world, etc.

 

[RedIbis]

Let's bet you'll claim they were faked.

Let's worry about that after they've been released, but we all know that's not going to happen. Maybe they'll release the 20-25 minutes of blacked out video. That should be convincing enough.

 

[Bell]

Let's worry about that after they've been released, but we all know that's not going to happen. Maybe they'll release the 20-25 minutes of blacked out video. That should be convincing enough.

Al Qaida confirms Osama's death. How does that convince you?

 

[NewtonTrino]

There has to be a legitimate reason for classifying it. "We don't want anyone to see them" won't make the cut.

Exactly. I don't have a problem with them holding back the photos if there is a real concern about operational security or something like that.

But just because they are icky isn't a good enough reason.

 

[I Am The Scum]

But just because they are icky isn't a good enough reason.

I agree. Good thing the White House isn't using that reason, nor is anyone else as far as I'm aware.