Who is Althouse? * View only LAW posts * Contribute * Shop AMAZON*
Interesting, I thought that the "no but I want it released" answer would lead and it is is third! I believe that he is indeed dead, but showing the photo should slightly reduce the crazies that will say he is still alive.Slightly.Trey
How can we make our Downfall videos without it?
Yeah, nothing good will come of it. Sure. Let's see some more pictures of naked Abu Ghraib prisoners on leashes. What harm did that do? Did it make the current POTUS look bad? Did that bitch Hillary! complain about releasing those pictures?
Not releasing it is just asking for trouble, making the release more wanted and talked about until it eventually is forced later. let's avoid all that bullshit and get it over with. All this useless debate now could have been avoided by showing it immediately. Stop the freaking drama. It's just a dead guy, not the first or the last any of us will see. Hell, we even have the Shroud of Turin to look at, and this ain't no savior here.
When will the West learn to stop worrying about false outrage from the Jihadists? I mean, they only react one way, and they are completely willing to manufacture "incidents" about which to do so. Come on.The only outrage anyone should worry about is outrage from moral, honest people. When will the Republicans get that? Trump gets it, hence his popularity.Trey
Oh for crying out loud, release the stinking picture, Obama. You're not our Mommy or Daddy to tell us what we can and can't handle seeing. I'm sure I've seen far, far worse in the Time-Life World War II collection. Hell, let Al-Jazeera release it for all I care.
Allen nails it. Nothing stopped Democrats from shamelessly pushing fake Koran stories and recyclng Abu Ghraib porn ad nauseum.But now... its somehow differentFen's Law. Again.
He needs to wait for the politically optimal time.
He needs to wait for the politically optimal time.Yup. He's got to bait another game show host into sqaundering a 2012 candidacy.
I'd just like to see that #$#@!!@! with his head blown off. That may be a weakness, but seriously, that's all. The nutjobs are going to be nutjobs whether the photos are released or not. Let me have my blood lust sated.
I like the comment Instapundit put up pointing out the inconsistency between the belief that a picture of Bin Laden with half his face shot off is to inflammatory, but never ending pictures of Abu Ghraib are... not.Ha!I see I am late to the party. ;-)
I'd not only release it, I'd nail a copy to every Mosque in the western world. Signed; Love, Jesus
So Obama is back to being a pussy?That was quick.
Showing it won't piss of the right people, so we have dithering after all. See how it happens as soon as he really has a choice.
I am with AllenS on this, show us more pictures of Abu Ghraib because that would calm the Arab street and the ROP in general. Muslims are so sensitive pictures of a dead OBL could set off a whole new round of beheadings that they could not stop themselves from performing.
Since I don't trust the judgment of politicians on *anything,* I'm not sure why I'd make an exception on this issue.
Release the photos!Some of the Islamists may come to understand that there is nothing pretty about martyrdom......and there ain't gonna be 72 virgins hanging around for a guy with a couple of holes in his head.
I am good with whatever they decide to do. They got the SOB, and that's what is important.If they believe that there is benefit in not releasing the photo, fine by me. If they believe that by not releasing the photo, the GOP will have to deal with loons like the left has to deal with truthers and that is to their political benefit, fine by me.
What Synova said.*I'm even later to the party...*wv: uniptini
the GOP will have to deal with loonsSince when does wanting confirmation of a kill make one a loon?
I think it preferable to release the photos, but I don't think it important to do so. Personally, I would look at the photos, but it is not something I feel that it is important for me to do.
I'm with Fen and AllenS totally. Somehow the concern over inflaming the peoples rises up when different posteriors are in the drivers' seat.
I believed that the Abu Ghraib photos should have been withheld and, on the same principle, so should Bin Laden 's Kodak moment. That's not to say that the Islamic militants won't find some other reason to be pissed off at us, but it's not our responsibility to feed them outrage fodder. The picture of Bin Laden laid out on the coroner's table with a pork chop in his ass is bound to cause irritation in the Muslim world.
I want to see it. I don't know if it's bloodthirsty of me, but I do. There was something about him being in the ocean by the time I heard about it and before anybody got to see it that bothers me, whether there are good reasons for it or not.
Releasing the birth certificate solved all the problems. I'm sure releasing the photo would too.
Osama thought he was the Islamic bringer of holy jihad, the leader of the new order. But times were changing, the rebellions against Muslim fascists had started to spread, and history had passed him. Then, he died looking into a gun barrel of his hated enemy.We got him. We humiliated him. The Arab street needs to see that.
I believed that the Abu Ghraib photos should have been withheld and, on the same principle, so should Bin Laden 's Kodak moment.The Abu Ghraib photos were of our soldiers performing illegal acts. If they were inflammatory (which few Dems wanted to acknowledge at the time), that was deemed less important than giving America evidence of our own *failure*. The press clamored to have photos of the coffins of Dover. It was important, they said, for America to see the *costs* of war.But now we have evidence of a *success*. It is perfectly acceptable for us to ask to see that evidence. And the president wants to withhold it for us because he is afraid of our enemy.If we allow that, what will we not allow?
wait until the Arab world is begging to see the proof and then you release them, saying ok if you insist, we didn't want too ofend you but here you go.
@lincolntfYou're not our Mommy or Daddy to tell us what we can and can't handle seeing.He begs to differ.
We got him. We humiliated him. The Arab street needs to see that.Exactly."We found Saladin (Saddam) hiding in a hole. He surrendered without firing a shot and submitted to a hygiene inspection."And so:"We found the son of Mohammed hiding behind a woman..."
Is this administration capable of having a debate outside of the public eye?
Were they really this clueless about witholding evidence of OBL's death? Unbelievable. It would be nice to see Obama just make a decision at this point.
I want to see them and he better look like Suzanne Pleshette in The Byrds.
Definitely show them.The next best thing to having video of him blown from a gun or buried in a pig skin.PS Little Zero will blow this yet.
Releasing the photo is reopening a closed case to insert additional evidence after getting a 100% perfect verdict and judgement in your favor. Learn from a trial lawyer and stop while you are ahead.
Invite the world press to see it in a closed session with no cameras. You get the same degree of verification that you would get with releasing it.
It's to late anyway. What they should have done was layout his body and invite news crews to come verify that he was dead.Gruesome? Yes.But, you are trying to limit the growth of a Cult of Personality. Obama is making Osama into an eternal ideal if this continues. His handling of this really points out a lack of foresight, poor reasoning skills, and a bad case of decision paralysis.If you want a reasoned/informed voice in all this go read Michael Yon.
i think some of this is morbid curiosity.i would consider our troops first and foremost.It might cause more danger for them.Other than that-showing the non believers won't make a bit of difference.They'll think it's 'doctored' photo and the rest will just be enraged. We know he's dead and eventually everyone will figure it out. I don't know that the administration can LEGALLY release it anyway. Serves no purpose.Possibly more harm than good.He's gone.Let it go and get the next guy.
Who is advising him to release the photo?Gates and Clinton say No. Obama leans against it. Who is saying Yes?
Who thought it was a good idea to wait until three days after his death to decide?
Dammit Titus!!Suzanne Pleshette never played with The Byrds.Roger McGuinn never played in "The Birds"
I once saw a photo of what was left of a suicide bomber. All that remained was his head laying on top of his legs. I suspect that there would be fewer volunteers for that activity if the recruits could see the idiotic expression on his face.
I don't know that the administration can LEGALLY release it anywayLegally? We violated Paki airspace and sent in Dick Cheney's execution squad. Not that I mind. But lets not pretend legality is the limiting factor here.
So the fucking moojies get to dictate what photos Americans can and can't see, now?
This is a man with no clue of what it means to "stimulate the economy".Not only do I want to see it, but I want the folks in Gitmo, and elsewhere, to see it:Release it.
Obama concerned about Middle East sensitivities?Tell that to Daniel Pearl's widow.
The President should have announced the burial at sea in his speech Sunday night and it should have been broadcast live on the Internet.
How hard would it be to track the body at sea?This is a job for James Cameron.I hope his hog was devoured by a Octopus.
Interesting emotions abound about this successful military action that cut off the head of the enemy's military guerrilla force. Who cares what the dead body looks like? The evil forces in that lived in that dirtbag body are gone now.
Sixty I wasn't referring to the movie Octopussy.I was referring to an actual Octopus.
They should photoshop a Yankees baseball hat onto his head so everyone remembers well why we killed the bastard.
First Chip Ahoy should Photoshop it and animate it. Put a big smiley face on OBL, fill in the forehead hole and make him skip through a flower garden.
I don't need to see it in the theaters. I'll wait until it comes out on Wikileaks.
This Gates is a pussy. Does not understand the American people it seems.
Nice AJ, very nice.Plus everybody knows he was a Dodgers fan.
The photo don't mean jack.They need to release the scientific data of the autopsy including the dental records and DNA results so independent third parties can verifiy it. And if there are any confusion or additional questions they can just exhume the body to determine...errr...errrr.. well maybe not.
It is really amazing to consider the mad rush Obama had to release photos of our soldiers in coffins. Remember that?http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-02-10-obama-coffins_N.htmPropaganda against our war, from the antiwar president. At the time, the NYT and other antiwar outlets said that showing us these photos shows we can handle the truth, and shows transparency (which makes no sense... this shed light on nothing). Similarly, the left went nuts demanding we see more photos from Abu Ghraib.Now, many of these people think such a treatment of Osama Bin Laden would serve *NO PURPOSE*?It shows us that Osama Bin Laden is dead! Right now, we have Obama's word (which is quite credible in this case) alone. Is the president's word now sufficient to deny any evidence?There's no conclusive DNA test. Many thought he was dead for years. Most of his organization doesn't trust us, and killing OBL is a huge blow to this psychological blow to this organization and its allies. We are at war. They already disposed of the best evidence we got Osama, in weird respect for this man's twisted faith.This isn't about cheering some grisly, nasty picture. I know it shows a very old, weak, feeble man, who was executed without process. Most of us accept this as the best outcome.But showing photos of dead US Soldiers, or atrocities we already know happened? I think it's quite clear that there's some stunning hypocrisy going on.It is very weird to see the 'show them the photo' president suddenly refuse to show us the photos, because "no good can come of it". Why didn't he say that before?
I see via Drudge that Obama has refused to release any photos. Something about the risk to American troops. Nothing about the abject fear of moderate Islam.
@chucktodd Chuck ToddPOTUS to CBS "Imagine how the American people would react if Al Qaida killed one of our troops...and put photos of the body on the internet"Daniel Pearl???? Contractors' burned bodies hung from bridge??? C'mon, is he really that stupid?wv: suctuou
Chuck Todd tweeted a correction: CORRECTION: Incorrectly attributed quotes from House GOPer Mike Rogers to Pres. Obama. http://is.gd/eGSfe5And it's just as stupid that Mike Rogers said it.wv: matillog
Of course they shouldn't release the photos. How are they going to explain the freezer burns? Where did they dump the body? The Gulf of Tonkin?
they are hoping the Republicans are the only ones crying over this so as to paint them as extremists. But they are so wrong. Everyday people who never believed in conspiracy theories are questioning whether this occurred or not, esp if O continues to live the life of a king while wesuffer. Esp Texas, where Obama just told Perry he was not allowing more funds to help with wildfires ( I guess someone didn't tell Barry that some of those households may have voted for him )I know that if this was the Bush admin, the left would be crying liar like crazy.
Honestly, the Conservative GOP needs to acknowledge the facts, give Obama credit for making a good decision, and remember that, "it is the economy stupid" which sank Bush I who was being punished for the FED's lowering the interest rates on the CDs of the Greatest Generation retirees. That was the first time that many people mistakenly ASSUMED that Democrats were just another breed of pro American politicians.
Trooper: Dental records? Holy shit, they took out his teeth but didn't waterboard him? What kind of torture regime are we involved in here?
When it comes down to it, what are we trying to say here?"We killed Osama bin Laden! But shhhhhh. Don't tell the Muslim extremists. They'll get so mad."
What kind of torture regime are we involved in here?One that shoots first, then grabs a hold of a tooth with vice-clamps while asking, "is it safe?"(two days in a row for that reference...awesome)
I don't see the need to release the image at this point. Al Qaeda itself has essentially confirmed the kill by going silent. It's pretty obvious that al-Zawahiri and co. are scrambling at moment.
To show the photo or not? This is a "pussy" debate if there ever was one. As many others have mentioned here, other photos have been shown that could be called controversial. Gorey photos didn't bother the media back in the late 60's and early 70's, so what is the fuss now? The bastard's dead, and that's that.
People over there already think we're lying.Release a photo.
Jeez, people, Abu Ghraib was an offense. We, the U.S., all of us Americans, we were responsible. Owning up to what we'd done was important to do morally. It was bad for us. It pissed off Muslims around the world, as it pissed off any decent people, but that was the price we needed to pay for that outrage.Killing bin Laden was no such outrage. It was justified. We don't have anything to own up to, so if showing the picture will do any harm, then we shouldn't do it. I think most decent Muslims won't bear us any ill will, but it's the fundamentalists who will use any pictures to troll for new recruits. We have nothing to gain from showing the pictures.
So what is the standard then? If we're guilty (of arresting the people who did it and investigating before any photos were "scooped" by the press) then it doesn't matter if people get possessed by outrage and become violent psychopaths? It's important to flog ourselves in the media and count the dead?But if we've done something good, then we're supposed to keep quiet about it? Not put ourselves too much forward and avoid unseemly and potentially abrasive triumphalism?
Trooper - you know I hate your Yankees but in this case, I meant make him wear the hat because of what Bin Laden did to NYC.
Because I can see how "hey, it's best not to make unnecessary waves to avoid inflaming crazies" is a coherent opinion, even if I don't necessarily agree. People could die.But I can't see how making unnecessary waves to inflame violent crazies suddenly becomes a good idea, and dead people an appropriate cost, dependent on the subject matter.
I heard the NYT had pics of a priest molesting an altar boy but they were scared to publish the pics because some nuns might go crazy and smack them with their rulers.
And besides, like so many other things with this administration, it's the King's business, no one else's!WV, "boroc." Boroc II, ruler over all he surveys.
I don't think it is at all "crazy" or "extreme" to have misgivings about whether the official story is credible, given the haste with which the evidence was destroyed, and the reasoning given for it. So we completely destroyed all forensic evidence before the public even knew about the kill, ostensibly because radical muslims appreciate that we honored Islamic tradition in disposing of the remains . . . . of a radical Muslim leader, who we murdered (in their eyes) . . . Really!? That little touch is going to keep extremists at bay? Conspiracy theorists (I'm not one) aren't the only ones questioning this, although those who want the official story accepted would try to cast it that way.
Freeman, why should we care if "people over there" think we're lying?If we know the truth, their belief is not very relevant.
"But if we've done something good, then we're supposed to keep quiet about it? Not put ourselves too much forward and avoid unseemly and potentially abrasive triumphalism?"Yes. Sorry if this gets in the way of your chest-thumping jingoism, but grownups know, 1, that you should own up to mistakes, even when it's hard, and, 2, when to keep your mouth shut, even when you feel like crowing to the world. I know, being a grownup is sometimes hard, and sometimes it isn't as much fun or free than being a 5 year old who doesn't have a whole lot of responsibilities aside from knowing how to use the bathroom reliably. Sorry about that, but that's how life is.
We "owned up to" the abuses of Abu Ghraib before the media pretended they were forcing accountability. The pictures were only released by one of the guilty party's family after he was arrested and investigations were underway. Publicly "owning up to" the abuses there warranted an official statement that it happened and was being taken care of, including that people were removed, under arrest, and the incident being vigorously investigated.The rest, the constant flogging by self-important journalists and constant publication of ever more photos and the portrayals of our military as evil in order to gain political points wasn't adult behavior. It was opportunistic political theater by people not a whit concerned that our military might face emboldened foes and more people, on both sides, would die. Innocents in the crossfire would die. And you fail to explain why deaths in one instance are a good reason not to publish a picture once and deaths in the other instance are not important OTHER THAN your own statements making a single distinction... one thing shows the US in a bad light and should be emphasized no matter the results and the other thing shows the US in a good light and should be minimized.I think that's pretty clear.Fuss about jingoism all you like. It's not *grownup* to insist on the public degradation of someone or something you claim to love and then explain how it's actually the moral high ground. Abusers do that.Accountability is one thing. Seemingly getting off on tearing the country down, damn the consequences, is something else. And then to portray national pride as childish? Jingoism?Please don't think you can insult me by calling me childish.Perhaps we were all smarter when we were 5.
Had the administration stuck to a single and believable story to begin with then the picture would not be important at all. Instead we have heard so many different versions of what went on and what the situation in the mansion in Pakistan was like that I think the picture needs to be released to straighten out the story. Can this administration do anything right without screwing it up? I even read a story supposedly from a WH insider that said that the reason Zero had to sleep on his decision was because Valerie Jarrett kept talking him out of doing the job in the first place and that Leon Panetta made the decision and they told Zero after the job was on the way to being done and it was too late for him to stop it. Compare that version with the one Zero put out there and the one that is out there in the MSM today about the woman rushing the Seals and OBL being unarmed. Who to believe and what version to believe. The only thing for sure is that he is dead and to prove that the picture is necessary.
That thing you're using for the poll publishes the first 3 octets of the IP of everyone who comments within the poll interface.That's a 5-second shortcut to narrowing someone down from 1 in 4.2 million IPs to 1 in 255. It also gives a rough idea of where the poster lives.You really ought to take that thing down and find a better poll host, or at least delete and disable the comments.
We survived Two Girls One Cup, we can survive pictures of Osama bin Mohammed bin Awad bin Laden bin Finito.
Post a Comment