• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Cnn: Pentagon illegally destroyed photos of dead osama bin laden

I think that's a weak excuse.

Perhaps weak, but symbolism is a powerful thing and deprivation of it for their leader OBL seems appropriate. I'll need a helluva lot more evidence to change my opinion, while a simple lack of evidence doesn't say much. As much as I detest this President and everything he stands for, he did stumble and do something good in this instance. He waved it in front of our faces enough... but I don't think there's much for a conspiracy theorist to work with in this case, and that's a good thing.
 
Perhaps weak, but symbolism is a powerful thing and deprivation of it for their leader OBL seems appropriate. I'll need a helluva lot more evidence to change my opinion, while a simple lack of evidence doesn't say much. As much as I detest this President and everything he stands for, he did stumble and do something good in this instance. He waved it in front of our faces enough... but I don't think there's much for a conspiracy theorist to work with in this case, and that's a good thing.

The Islamofacists aren't going to hate us anymore than they already do, just because we offed UBL.

They know we offed UBL; or do they? Do they already know that UBL was dead long before the raid on Abottabad?

My point is, since the IF's are going to hate us anyway and they're going to come up with anti-American propaganda even if they have to lie; what difference does it make if we publicize the evidence of UBL's termination.
 
The Islamofacists aren't going to hate us anymore than they already do, just because we offed UBL.

They know we offed UBL; or do they? Do they already know that UBL was dead long before the raid on Abottabad?

My point is, since the IF's are going to hate us anyway and they're going to come up with anti-American propaganda even if they have to lie; what difference does it make if we publicize the evidence of UBL's termination.

Let's say we had hours of tape, names, ranks of the men who were there dumping OBL's body in the water, reams of pictures of dead OBL.... The islamofascists in this case are irrelevant - but you're right they won't hate us any more or less. What the islamofascists believe or do not believe he's dead - does it matter? Do we care? I think everyone is agreement that OBL is no longer consulting Al Qaeda. It may not make a difference if we publicize it, but I don't get the benefit of doing so.
 
If Osama bin Laden wasn't killed, where is he now?

Osama and Obama, with a one letter difference in their "names" have never been seen at the same time despite them both being famous.







:roll:
 
So the body was dumped at sea, all the photo evidence is destroyed, the SEAL Team that conducted the raid died soon after in a helicopter crash in Afghanistan. So no evidence now exists that the attack actually happened.

I'm not a conspiracy nut, but that is a rather alarming series of coincidences that essentially erased all evidence of the mission from the history books.

The SEAL team didn't all die. One of them wrote a book, for crying out loud.
 
Dead?
I'm saying you could make up a story that bin Laden died of natural causes and our government staged an elaborate raid on a random compound in order to claim credit for bin Laden's death and the existing evidence would back it up.




Obviously anyone could make up any story, actually proving that story is another matter.
 
Obviously anyone could make up any story, actually proving that story is another matter.

Well, again, that is my point! We are rapidly running out of evidence to prove the official report!
 
Video @: CNN: PENTAGON ILLEGALLY DESTROYED PHOTOS OF DEAD OSAMA BIN LADEN - YouTube

Admiral McGraven, "All Photos should be turned over to the CIA, and all should be destroyed". Is this a violation of the law? This does seem ridiculous? Why destroy them? This is not the way the law should be. How many rules were broken with this?
We need to pressure the intelligence community and the Pentagon with this.

Yeah - well maybe the government should sell them on Ebay, they might go for high.
 
From day one the media and many Americans wanted the photos of OBL released.

This is breaking news.

Well Judicial Watch comes through again.


Uncovered by JW: Top Pentagon Leader Ordered Destruction of bin Laden Death Photos

Judicial Watch Uncovers Email Revealing Top Pentagon Leader Ordered Destruction of bin Laden Death Photos

(Washington, DC) – >" Judicial Watch announced today that on January 31, 2014, it received documents from the Department of Defense (Pentagon) revealing that within hours of its filing a May 13, 2011, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit seeking photos of the deceased Osama bin Laden, U.S. Special Operations Commander, Admiral William McRaven ordered his subordinates to “destroy” any photos they may have had “immediately.” Judicial Watch had filed a FOIA request for the photos 11 days earlier.

The McRaven email, addressed to “Gentlemen,” instructs:

One particular item that I want to emphasize is photos; particularly UBLs remains. At this point – all photos should have been turned over to the CIA; if you still have them destroy them immediately or get them to the [redacted].

According to the Pentagon documents, McRaven sent his email on “Friday, May 13, 2011 5:09 PM.” The documents do not detail what documents, if any, were destroyed in response to the McRaven directive. The Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit seeking the documents was filed in the United States Court for the District of Columbia only hours earlier. Judicial Watch also announced the filing at a morning press conference.

On May 2, Judicial Watch had filed a FOIA request with the Defense Department seeking “all photographs and/or video recordings of Usama (Osama) Bin Laden taken during and/or after the U.S. military operation in Pakistan on or about May 1, 2011.” Federal law contains broad prohibitions against the “concealment, removal, or mutilation generally” of government records.

The records containing the McRaven “destroy them immediately” email were produced as a result of a June 7, 2013, FOIA request and a subsequent lawsuit against the Defense Department for records relating to reports of the 2011 McRaven purge directive. McRaven’s order was first mentioned at the end of a 2011 draft reportby the Pentagon’s inspector general (IG) examining whether the Obama administration gave special access to Hollywood executives planning the film “Zero Dark Thirty.” According the draft report, “ADM McRaven also directed that the names and photographs associated with the raid not be released. This effort included purging the combatant command’s system of all records related to the operation and providing these records to another Government Agency.” The reference to the document purge did not appear in the final IG report.

The move by McRaven to purge the photos appears to have come, at least in part, in response to aggressive efforts by Judicial Watch to obtain images of the deceased bin Laden that President Obama, in a rewrite of federal open records law, had refused to disclose. In addition to its May 2, 2011, FOIA request with the Pentagon Judicial Watch filed an identical request on May 3, 2011, with the CIA. When neither the Defense Department nor the CIA complied with the FOIA requests, Judicial Watch, in June 2011, filed FOIA lawsuits against both agencies. In the course of the litigation, the Pentagon claimed that it had “no records responsive to plaintiff’s request.” ..."<

Continue -> Uncovered by JW: Top Pentagon Leader Ordered Destruction of bin Laden Death Photos | Judicial Watch





Order: ‘Destroy’ bin Laden photos

>"
A senior operations officer in the U.S. military ordered for photos of Osama bin Laden’s corpse to be destroyed 11 days after he was killed, an email released Monday by a conservative legal group shows.

Judicial Watch released the document Monday after obtaining it through a Freedom of Information Act request.

On May 2, 2011, the American Navy Seal team shot and killed bin Laden at a compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. Judicial Watch quickly filed a FOIA request with the Pentagon and the CIA seeking photos of bin Laden’s body, which have never been released. The Associated Press says it had also filed a request with the Pentagon asking for the photos."<

Read more: Order:

U.S. Military Leaders Tight-Lipped On Destruction Of Osama Bin Laden Death Pics
Pentagon leaders are keeping quiet on why the head of U.S. special forces ordered pictures of deceased al-Qaeda chieftain Osama bin Laden destroyed.
U.S. Military Leaders Tight-Lipped On Destruction Of Osama Bin Laden Death Pics

I also think the photos should have been released, I thought it was a mistake not to do so. But I'm not convinced that we have a right to see the photos given their nature and context as part of our foreign and security policy.
 
The Islamofacists aren't going to hate us anymore than they already do, just because we offed UBL.

They know we offed UBL; or do they? Do they already know that UBL was dead long before the raid on Abottabad?

My point is, since the IF's are going to hate us anyway and they're going to come up with anti-American propaganda even if they have to lie; what difference does it make if we publicize the evidence of UBL's termination.

You don't know that though. It isn't implausible to imagine that parading Bin Laden's corpse over the media would result in negative consequences for the United States either in terms of popular distaste in the places where we need support, by encouraging recruits to take the leap and join a militant organization, or even to coax groups into launching attacks that otherwise would not have been launched to avenge the humiliation.

Again I think the benefits outweigh those potential consequences but dismissing them outright is irresponsible.
 
I'll believe something is foul when someone produces evidence that shows someone lied, hid the truth, tried to mislead the public, or that he's really alive and hunkered down in fear of being discovered.

Until someone provides proof otherwise - he's dead - and I really don't need to see photos (I'm puzzled as to why people are still hounding on this, too).
 
You don't know that though. It isn't implausible to imagine that parading Bin Laden's corpse over the media would result in negative consequences for the United States either in terms of popular distaste in the places where we need support, by encouraging recruits to take the leap and join a militant organization, or even to coax groups into launching attacks that otherwise would not have been launched to avenge the humiliation.

Again I think the benefits outweigh those potential consequences but dismissing them outright is irresponsible.

Anyone that would be pissed off about it already hates us and nothing we do will make them not hate us. That being the reality, it serves as a lame excuse to destroy the historical record of the most important kill we've scored since WW2; unless, of course, there's another motive for destroying the alleged evidence.
 
Video @: CNN: PENTAGON ILLEGALLY DESTROYED PHOTOS OF DEAD OSAMA BIN LADEN - YouTube

Admiral McGraven, "All Photos should be turned over to the CIA, and all should be destroyed". Is this a violation of the law? This does seem ridiculous? Why destroy them? This is not the way the law should be. How many rules were broken with this?
We need to pressure the intelligence community and the Pentagon with this.
These are photos you're never going to see anyway, why do you care?
 
I'll believe something is foul when someone produces evidence that shows someone lied, hid the truth, tried to mislead the public, or that he's really alive and hunkered down in fear of being discovered.

Until someone provides proof otherwise - he's dead - and I really don't need to see photos (I'm puzzled as to why people are still hounding on this, too).

I'm equally puzzled as to why someone would make such an effort to destroy all the evidence of the event.
 
Video @: CNN: PENTAGON ILLEGALLY DESTROYED PHOTOS OF DEAD OSAMA BIN LADEN - YouTube

Admiral McGraven, "All Photos should be turned over to the CIA, and all should be destroyed". Is this a violation of the law? This does seem ridiculous? Why destroy them? This is not the way the law should be. How many rules were broken with this?
We need to pressure the intelligence community and the Pentagon with this.

The Admiral's order would have Navy photos destroyed, but would have no effect on any photos already in CIA hands. So they should ask for CIA photos.
 
>“The McRaven ‘destroy them immediately’ email is a smoking gun, revealing both contempt for the rule of law and the American’s people right to know,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The Obama administration has tried to cover this scandal up – and our lawsuit exposed it. We demand further investigation of the effort to destroy documents about the bin Laden raid.”<
Americans do not have a right to see those photos, for at least 7 years after they were made, if not longer to protect the technology used in taking those photos.
 
Anyone that would be pissed off about it already hates us and nothing we do will make them not hate us. That being the reality, it serves as a lame excuse to destroy the historical record of the most important kill we've scored since WW2; unless, of course, there's another motive for destroying the alleged evidence.

Several points. One is that once again you do not know that you merely believe it. Moreover there is a vast continuum of hatred and dislike and you do not know that the release of these photos would not push people further in a particular direction. Secondly there is a large difference between dislike or hate and choosing to pick up a weapon. Finally the point that it might have encouraged or forced groups to carry out or attempt to carry out heavy attacks to avenge the humiliation of the plastering of his photo around the world that they otherwise would not have.

Fact of the matter is we don't know and there is reason enough to at least consider those points.
 
Several points. One is that once again you do not know that you merely believe it. Moreover there is a vast continuum of hatred and dislike and you do not know that the release of these photos would not push people further in a particular direction. Secondly there is a large difference between dislike or hate and choosing to pick up a weapon. Finally the point that it might have encouraged or forced groups to carry out or attempt to carry out heavy attacks to avenge the humiliation of the plastering of his photo around the world that they otherwise would not have.

Fact of the matter is we don't know and there is reason enough to at least consider those points.

J
How many Islamofacists have stopped hating us, because of our sensitivity attempts? Name one islamofacist group that restated their anti-American platform.
 
The Pentagon is the civilian part of our military. There is only one person above the Secretary of Defense in the Chain of Command, the Commander in Chief aka POTUS.

False, the POTUS is outranked by lobbyists, who are outranked by their clients (hedge funds, oil cos., Wallstreet, etc.)
 
J
How many Islamofacists have stopped hating us, because of our sensitivity attempts? Name one islamofacist group that restated their anti-American platform.

That isn't what I said.
 
That isn't what I said.

You claim publicizing these photos could cause retaliation. Show one IF group that has changed it's anti-American platform because of the measures we've taken to appease their sensitivities.

We've heard time-and-again that these offenses will cause increased retaliatory attacks. Those haven't happened.
 
The Pentagon is largely run by military personnel. Admiral McRaven was the one who supposedly ordered the photos destroyed. I'm sure you know that admiral is a military title.

I have no idea why they were destroyed. I'd rather they weren't. But like clockwork, you turn this into a civilian vs. military issue and make it All About Obama.

Under the Goldwater-Nichols Act, in this particular mission the chain of command is POTUS (CnC) to Secretary of Defense Gates to Admiral McRaven who was the commander of Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC). There were only two individuals above McRaven who could have ordered McRaven to have the photos destroyed. Sec. Def. Gates and President Obama. Since Gates in his book has said that he was left out of the loop many times by the Obama White House and second rate incompetent civilians in the White House have been playing generals, it looks like it was Obama or Valerie Jarrett who ordered the photos destroyed.

BTW: McRaven is known as an Obama yes man.
 
Under the Goldwater-Nichols Act, in this particular mission the chain of command is POTUS (CnC) to Secretary of Defense Gates to Admiral McRaven who was the commander of Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC). There were only two individuals above McRaven who could have ordered McRaven to have the photos destroyed. Sec. Def. Gates and President Obama. Since Gates in his book has said that he was left out of the loop many times by the Obama White House and second rate incompetent civilians in the White House have been playing generals, it looks like it was Obama or Valerie Jarrett who ordered the photos destroyed.

BTW: McRaven is known as an Obama yes man.

You have no way of knowing that it was Obama or Jarrett.
 
Video @: CNN: PENTAGON ILLEGALLY DESTROYED PHOTOS OF DEAD OSAMA BIN LADEN - YouTube

Admiral McGraven, "All Photos should be turned over to the CIA, and all should be destroyed". Is this a violation of the law? This does seem ridiculous? Why destroy them? This is not the way the law should be. How many rules were broken with this?
We need to pressure the intelligence community and the Pentagon with this.

Yeah, I'm not 100% sure the dude is for real dead. Could be, but all we really have for evidence is the word of our government, and that thing isn't trustworthy in the least.
 
Back
Top Bottom