President Barack Obama announced he would not submit photos that show Osama bin Laden with a bullet hole in his head, sparking a heated debate in the U.S. about whether they should be shown to the public.
said he threw the corpse of Bin Laden to the ocean because it would have been difficult to get a country to accept him in time. There has been speculation about the desire to avoid the possible burial place became a shrine.
Government officials say they have irrefutable proof of their identity. Indicate that the DNA of the al-Qaeda leader agrees on a "virtual 100%" with the DNA of their relatives.
But attention has focused on the existence of photographs taken after the death of Bin Laden. The White House would have a photo of al-Qaeda leader with a large wound between the eyes as well as other of his body and the funeral at sea.
In an interview with CBS, Obama said he would not release the photos, ensuring that the "very graphic images" could inciting violence and become instruments of propaganda.
"Error presidential"
Leon Panetta, director of the CIA, had suggested a day earlier in an interview that the photos would be made public eventually, but gave no dates.
"The whole point of sending our soldiers, instead of making an air raid was to obtain irrefutable proof of the death of Bin Laden"
Lindsey Graham Republican Senator.
"Obviously the government has been talking about how to make this the best way, but I do not think there's any doubt that eventually a picture will be presented to the public, "Panetta said before the White House to disavow his statement.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, said the presidential decision not to show the photos was a mistake that "extends this debate unnecessarily."
"The whole point of sending our soldiers, instead of making an air raid was to obtain irrefutable proof of the death of Bin Laden, "said Graham.
" I know that Bin Laden is dead, but the best way to defend and protect our interests eign is to prove that fact to the world. "
is possible that someone presents a legal challenge to the decision of the White House under the Freedom Information, a case that would likely according to some lawyers polled by the BBC correspondent in Washington, Tom Geoghegan.
The U.S. government has been at that point before. In July 2003 he was criticized for submit photos of the bodies of the sons of deposed Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein, Uday and Qusay to prove that the U.S. forces had killed.
"But the decision was undoubtedly a success that managed to silence most conspiracy theories," says our correspondent.
"presenting risks outweigh the benefits. The conspiracy theorists around the world will say that the photos are retouched anyway, and there is a real risk that his presentation would serve only to inflame public opinion in Middle East "
Geoghegan explains that before the president announced his decision, the Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton and Defense Secretary Robert Gates, were advising him not to reveal the pictures by the fear that give the impression that Washington was delighted with the death of Bin Laden and unleashed reprisals on the Arab world.
One person who has seen the photos, Republican Mike Rogers, chief of the Intelligence Committee of the House of Representatives, said the publication of the images may make the job of U.S. troops in Iraq or Afghanistan "more difficult than it already is."
"presenting risks outweigh the benefits. The conspiracy theorists around the world will say that the photos are retouched anyway, and there is a real risk that his presentation would serve only to inflame public opinion in the Middle East. "
" Imagine what the American people would react if al-Qaeda kills one of our soldiers or a military leader and put those photos online, "said Rogers stating that" Osama bin Laden is not a trophy. "violent Self
Still others claim that there is a principle at stake: to show the body of Bin Laden could compromise the way he has behaved so far U.S. . and that the picture would become a dirty image, defining the story of the death of Bin Laden.
The New Yorker magazine ClicPhillip Gourevitch asks, "Have we learned something of the past decade about the overwhelming power of the raw images of violence and polarize a defining moment in history?".
"The pictures of the Iraqi prison of Abu Ghraib were the non-paper of an unofficial policy that was supposed to be kept secret, but we learned that the picture of violence that one always deals in large As a self-portrait. "
"By getting rid of Bin Laden, Obama has taken a major step to leave that era behind us. Do we want a picture of bin Laden's skull pierced to eclipse that time? "asked the columnist Gourevitch.
projected a professional operation without fear and was done without arrogance or gloating, considers Gourevitch, and marked a departure from the rhetoric of" we will draw the cache "of government Bush.
"Bin Laden's death enables us to move on, but not if that page is printed with an official photograph of the trophy with his head smashed.
0 comments:
Post a Comment