I’m putting this up as a diary just because it’s an opportunity to again demonstrate that we disagree a lot on this site, and there is no GMD party line. I think that’s one of the things that makes this site cooler than the other dKos style sites.
While I agree with everything Jack says below, there is an overriding principle that he does not address: government transparency and the way we treat public documents.
As a matter of principle, I have always believed that all government documents and records should be open and accessible unless they impact some sort of operational integrity (of an operation underway, not one recently wrapped) or unreasonably impact personal privacy. Neither is the case here. That’s not to say that Jack’s points aren’t valid, but it’s the responsibility of government to protect our rights and protect our safety, even though doing both is always harder than picking one over the other.
If our principles of open government are to have any meaning, they have to apply even when it’s uncomfortable. Otherwise, we are essentially saying we’re all for open government records, unless we need to withhold them for the public’s own good.
That argument simply brings us full circle, leaving the concept of “our own good” to whoever is in power, and whoever supports them in power. And that’s not open government at all.
Anywayz, I’m on board with you more than Jack, per my comment below. I appreciate the sensitivities involved, but we have to stand firm on the principle of transparency lest we give short shrift to why ostensibly we’re fighting this insane war in the first place.
To hide the photos because of some nebulous fear of backlash is the same kind of argument made for the suspension of civil liberties. Ben Franklin was right about safety and liberty…
Without going into the arguments back and forth that have already been made, I don’t regard the kind of widespread sensational release that this would inevitably mean as essential to upholding government transparency. We don’t routinely circulate the death photos of executed criminals (at least I hope we don’t), so that argument fails to convince me. We also don’t stand our national enemies’ heads out on pikes, no matter how horrible their crimes might have been. Lets not creep any further back into the Dark Ages than is necessary.
No; I’ve been thinking that this Obama decision, for me, hearkens back to the statesman I worked hard to elect. Fresh from the birther unveiling, I think Obama has learned the valuable lesson that no matter what kind of “proof” you provide ideological disbelievers, they will hold fast to their delusion; and to indulge that delusion in any way is to somehow diminish the President while elevating the deluded. It would have been so easy for Obama to gain fifteen minutes of blood-lust love at the expense of our already crippled national ethos. I say, good for him for resisting that “mission accomplished” moment.
Most certainly, the photos should be available for viewing by individuals for legitimate purposes; but not for reproduction at this time.
Odum –
1. I’m stunned that you propose the notion that government has no right to tell us what’s best for us, and enforce that decision. It’s hard to justify compulsory education or public health measures on the basis of your position…and I know you’re in favor of those. I realize choosing what to reveal is a different use of power, but making the tradeoff between liberty and safety is exactly what we hire these people to do.
2. The safety issue outweighs the “public right to see the blood and gore immediately” issue. I’m having a little trouble with the “we absolutely had to reveal these photos, knowing very well they could inflame anger and endanger Americans, because we believe in the unalterable principle of something called ‘Open Government'”. That would be particularly comforting for bereaved families.
3. Release the photos in 2 years, in the winter. By that time, everyone but Elvis nuts will believe he’s dead, and the passions will not be inflamed. And, no one will make T-shirts that we’ll have to see all summer with his dead body and some stupid “Boo-Yah!” type statement underneath it. (In fact, preventing the T-shirts might be my most important argument)
in 1936.
(Unless, of course, you want to count lynchings. And we probably should. You could send postcards of lynchings through the mail legally until 1908, although many exist from the 1930s that were postmarked and delivered.)
Stop. We’ve let the blood-thirsty cretins amongst us dominate our politics and our culture for too long now.
It was George W. Bush that turned a criminal into a general into the next Saladin with his Duhmerican crusade. If the focus had been on catching this criminal on September 12, 2011, this most likely would have been behind us in 2002. Instead, we are still in the midst of a monumental tragedy and moral collapse that our country, as we thought we knew it, will probably not survive.
Our country wasted $1.5T (Trillion), over 7,000 American and 250,000 Iraqi and Afghani lives on the Osama goose chase, because of Bush’s pride, arrogance, and incompetence – and the failure of our political system, and, let’s face it – our culture.
So, while our country might be sick, we don’t have to be. We – as in “Americans”, but also we as in “decent people” – don’t show the dead bodies of executed criminals in this country – anymore. And the Geneva Convention does not allow the promulgation of pictures of enemy dead, and this one would definitely be promulgated.
I think it was the right decision to get this criminal, one can assume that there are several Pakistani higher-ups with anti-American sentiments, especially given the arrogance and liberal use of deadly force against civilians we’ve used in the last decade in the Middle East, so I understand the secrecy of the raid. It was a quick clean round-up of a criminal.
So the adult in charge made an adult decision to go in quickly and quietly and get his man, and then another right decision, given the rule of law – and civilization – not to show the pictures. So, Osama the criminal’s/general’s picture doesn’t get to adorn our internets. We’ll have to settle for videos of U-S-A chanting mobs. Alas, loonies and wingnuts will have to use their Photoshop software to get their jollies.
(The Abu Ghraib torture photos were shame enough for this decent American.)
I’m glad Osama is dead, but I’m even more glad that Bush is no longer president.
I do say good riddance to Osama, no praise be unto him, and I await Bush’s, et. al., indictments for war crimes. Here’s hoping there’s an enterprising young British barrister or German lawyer that wants to make a name for him/herself.
Transparency isn’t the only core value, but it is extremely important.
Our entire system of government and the rule of law is based on the principle that governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. When governments lie to the people, or conceal their activities, they make it impossible for the governed to know what they are doing, and, consequently, to exercise their right of self-government.
Transparency is not absolute, though. There are exceptions beyond the discussed exception for interfering with pending operations. Protection of privacy is one of them. Much as we might like to, we don’t have the ability to inspect our neighbors’ income tax returns or the results of the child abuse investigation even if it arose from a report that you filed.
Finally, no matter how much you ask, the government won’t release the voice recordings from an airplane crash, or the last transmissions from the crashed space shuttles.
That’s what I think is most analogous to what we’re talking about here.
I don’t think this is a slam dunk. I do think that it’s a close call. I see the value in a full narrative of the operation, including photos and DNA results. I just think the potential benefits, which most decidedly do not include persuading the former birthers who can now be known as deathers, are not absolute, and in this case don’t outweigh the negatives.
We can afford to be decent and magnanimous in victory.
this isnt about transparency. knowing it was done is transparency. this is about some printing press starting to ramp up with posters of the poor boy who got smacked around a little bit after killing 3000+ folks who simply went to work one day…
They dont need thepublicity opening or the team building exercise.
“I think here, Donald, that showing these photos would be, not only in bad form, but, perhaps, stir up forces sympathetic to Mr. Laden, and create even more anger among peoples of the world who are not necessarily at ease with American foreign policy. I think…”
“I think, PolitenessMan, that I don’t give a shit about form. I want to see those goddamn photos. And, by the way, I want to see your birth certificate.”
“Well…I’m sure we will be seeing these photos soon anyway, what with all the debate, and an election coming up next year. I’m thinking of the little kiddies out there. Would showing these photos make kiddies think that the government only kills bad people, and that, say, if there’s a ‘bogeyman’ in their closet, they need to call Obama to send the Navy Seals to their bedroom?”
“If I were your boss, PolitenessMan, I’d fire your ass.”
“If you were my boss, you’d already be in a hospital for head trauma from continual strikes of my Steel Hankie.”
PB–I just feel that showing these photos is not…what?…closure?…but more like giving the finger. Ah…don’t worry. They’ll be shown.