Comments on: To sanitize photos is to distort history Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:57:19 +0000 hourly 1 By: BajaArizona Sat, 21 May 2011 19:19:39 +0000 The film of innocent people holding hands while jumping from a burning skyscraper is something I only needed to see once. They are seared into my memory forever, even though I have refused to watch 9/11 footage since that day.

The footage of Bin Laden gloating after the attacks is also something I only needed to watch one time.

We cheered the news of Bin Laden’s death not out of jingoism, but out of solidarity with his victims. Was it wrong to celebrate Hitler’s death? Even the Dalai Lama has gone on record as saying that WW2 was a just war. Bin Laden may not have racked up as large a body count as Hitler, but that was simply because he lacked the means, not the will.

Bin Laden didn’t only hijack those planes, he hijacked human progress. He damaged every single person in the world and every person who will ever be born by derailing countless crucial efforts to improve life on this planet. How much better would all our lives be if he had never existed? How much progress could have been made toward peace and coexistence and medicine if he had not caused the diversion of trillions of dollars and the disruption of millions, or even billions, of lives?

We now know that he was actively planning even more attacks, ever trying to kill more and more innocent people, be they Christian, Jew, Atheist, and especially Muslim–who ironically made up the vast majority of his victims. He damaged me, he damaged you, and he wantonly murdered on a global scale.

His death was a legitimate cause for celebration, even with the knowledge that the war he started continues.

Yes, killing serial murderers isn’t pleasant. But celebrating their justified deaths isn’t jingoistic. Confusing the joy felt by this madman’s demise with jingoism reveals a deep immaturity about the concept of right and wrong.

By: Camerahide Sun, 08 May 2011 11:27:02 +0000 In order to bring peace to a conflict we need to show the peace makers the reality of war, photos of the dead, the cry of the innocent, and the war cry of the oppressor.
James Pembroke

By: villaincostumes Fri, 06 May 2011 12:00:42 +0000 The point is that here that It isn’t against Islam that we are taking a stand. If We look at the following Religions Judaism, Christianity/Catholicism, Islam: Strip away all the Prophets, Son of God etc and you have the one God that ultimately started the Paradigm.

But to be clear, the fight is against, not a religious sect, but Leaders, who would keep their followers ignorant of the truth of their Religion and its True Teachings for the sole purpose of Political Power or Gain. I am not Islamic but I do have Islamic friends. Just as I have who follow Buddhism, Hindu, etc.

We now need to be watchful of who will fill the void that has been created. I spoke to someone today who wanted to see the pictures to justify an IN YOUR FACE approach to Terrorism. What he failed to realize is that by taking this approach, that others may find it offensive and the result is conflict.

As a side note: I find it interesting that Pakistan did not know that Osama resided within their boarders when footage (either mocked up or authentic) showed Pakistani People mourning Osama’s demise! That is for other more politically able people to handle than I.

I have also seen photo’s of death, Real life burn victims from explosions. It’s not a pretty site. It is best to move on and continue with the healing of the wounds of the past.

We can but lead by example to attempt to make the world a better place. In which we can acknowledge conflict between opponents but work toward resolution in less collateral damaging ways.

By: doctorjay317 Fri, 06 May 2011 02:00:24 +0000 I understand and support President Obama’s decision not to release the bloody images of Osama bin Laden, for valid fear of fanning flames”

As if the killing of Osama hasn’t already fanned the flames.


By: CarolineWebb Fri, 06 May 2011 01:05:40 +0000 I agree with supermanasdf. There is no advantage to showing the image and to refuse to do it is not infantilizing anyone.

Initially I expected to see the photo, and I thought what would be wrong with showing the washed body photo, but when I read what the circle around Obama and he himself felt would be best for the US and for the world, I rapidly changed my mind. The priority is to save more lives from being lost to terrorist behavior. The big plan is to remove terrorism from everyone’s lives and return to a rule of law in all our relationships. Worldwide. The US decision here is for reasons of safety of all people, not just the Americans. To show a photo will definitely not assist in the big game plan to reduce and eliminate terrorist actions.

And if there is another big hit in the States, not having shown the photos can not be dragged out as a reason it happened – America will have the higher moral ground and no muddle about causation of terror strikes would occur. Again this strengthens the overall plan by the US and by all allies and sympathizers amongst the nations of the world to move on from a very ugly stage of global development.

So, to sum up, not showing the photos is the equivalent of starving terrorist organizations and individuals of their oxygen – politically, culturally, religiously, morally. It all helps in the evolution of a world order that disavows the use of terror. These concerns are vastly more important than this blog writer seems to understand.

By: ZaphodQB Fri, 06 May 2011 01:00:13 +0000 Obama’s reasoning that he does not want to insight retaliation against USA by showing the photos does not make sense.
Does he think that they won’t retaliate because we killed OBL, but that by showing the photos we will push them over the edge and cause them to get mad?

By: derdutchman Thu, 05 May 2011 21:25:16 +0000 He’s dead. It’s been over three days. He’s not coming back. Take a picture of that.

By: jatondon Thu, 05 May 2011 18:11:57 +0000 I support the decision not to show the pictures, since it will only inflame the limited intelligence that reside in the Middle East.

If he were alive new video will be published ty adoring fanatics soon enough.

Its not my terust of government and politicians (I am not one of the limited IQ Middle Easterners that alQuida recruits).

By: supermanasdf Thu, 05 May 2011 17:29:38 +0000 “I understand and support President Obama’s decision not to release the bloody images of Osama bin Laden, for valid fear of fanning flames”

Then what’s the point of this article? To brag about your resume? You’ve just stated the reason he’s not showing the photos. It’s not to “sanitize history”. It’s not part of some conspiracy to “infantilize America”.

If the photos are released to the public, it will be seen as a trophy shot, as gloating. They will be printed on T-shirts with racist captions. They’ll be printed on giant signs carried by violent mobs around the world within hours. Those who don’t believe it’s Osama won’t be convinced by the photos, anyway.

Why do they have to be released Right Now, anyway? Why not 10 years from now, when the emotional impact of the event has diminished? Photos don’t dissolve if not released within days of being taken.

By: beijingyank Thu, 05 May 2011 16:54:15 +0000 Dear Deborah Copaken Kogan,

The first casualty of war is the truth.