The FBI's Newest Tool — Google Images

lee317 writes "The FBI recently used a photograph of Spanish politician Gaspar Llamazares as an example of what Osama Bin Laden might look like today. According to Reuters, Special Agent Jason Pack said a forensic artist had been unable to find suitable features from the FBI's database of photographs and used a picture from the Internet instead. That photo turned out to be one of Llamazares, who apparently looks strikingly similar to what the FBI thinks Bin Laden would look like with a few extra years on him. 'I am stupefied the FBI has used my photo — but it could have been anyone's — to compose a picture of a terrorist. It affects my honor, my own image and also the security of all us,' Llamazares said."

Comments

Terrorists!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

We should constantly live in fear of tribal men in caves 8000 miles away at all times. It's the new American way.

Re:Terrorists!!!

[DJ Particle]

We should constantly live in fear of dead tribal men in caves 8000 miles away at all times. It's the new American way.

Corrected for you. :) Even Fox reported his death in 12/2001

Re:Terrorists!!!

[QuoteMstr]

Because we've always been at war with Eurasia?

Re:Terrorists!!!

[DougF]

Hate to break the news, but for us married guys, what's in our pants has no freedom anymore...

Re:Terrorists!!!

[daseinw]

It's like we're living in "1984" and news just gets erased from the collective mind.

This whole article is odd in light of the fact that I'm pretty sure the FBI knows that bin Laden is dead. I mean the man was once releasing more videos each week than Tupac until he started toting that kidney dialysis machine through the mountains. Then... nothing.

After all, the FBI's counter-terrorism chief, Dale Watson, also http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/2135473.stmadmitted to believing that bin laden was dead eight (8) years ago.
Wait... and didn't Afghanistan's current president, Hamid Karzai, http://edition.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/central/10/06/karzai.binladen/admit to believing the same thing 8 years ago?
Wait... and didn't Israeli Intelligence also http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2002/me_terrorism_10_16.htmladmit the same thing 8 years ago?

But I guess if you can keep the myth alive, then it becomes that much easier to keep support going for spending money on the current military action in Afghanistan.

Re:Terrorists!!!

[westlake]

We should constantly live in fear of tribal men in caves 8000 miles away at all times.

Osama isn't tribal.

He's medieval.

His family made its fortune in heavy construction for the Saudi royal family. Net worth $7 billion.

Chicken feed. Prince Alwaleed alone is worth $18 billion. No Saudi whatever his merit or ambition can climb higher so long as his family rules.

Do I have to tell you how this story ends?

Neither is it psychologically insignificant that building the iconic mosque or royal palace was where the bin Ladens began.

Osama has spent his entire life on the outside looking in.

Close but no cigar.

Rich List 2009 - 7# The Bin Laden Family

Re:Terrorists!!!

[hanabal]

see now, imagine the extra work old Winston will have to do because of new technology. When the war swaps over, will he have to go and change all the posts like the one above on all the forums. that would take a while

Re:Terrorists!!!

[jonbryce]

No. We are at war with Eastasia. Do keep up. Eurasia (Russia) are our allies.

Re:Terrorists!!!

[Captain Splendid]

To the idiots who modded this flamebait, ask yourself this: How long do you think a 6 foot, 4 inches tall man, needing serious regular medical care, whilst on the run in the mountains of Pakistan, will survive?

That's right kids, he's dead. The US has been fighting a fucking ghost.

Blame google not FBI

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

Come on, the FBI agent simply went to images.google.com and entered "osama bin laden now" and hit "I am feeling lucky". How could he know that he should not have been feeling lucky that day? Blame google, not the agent.

Re:Blame google not FBI

[sakdoctor]

Osama Bin Laden now

Re:Blame google not FBI

[MartinSchou]

Of course, the irony in that statement is that now the top link for osama bin laden now HAS a picture of the Spanish politician.

Re:But, Señor Llamazares is a Commie

[Anonymous Coward]

...Thats the real reason they used his photo. The FBI has been very openly anti-communist, and hes a popular politician. Whats the best way to get rid of an opposing politician? Call him Osama bin Laden.

Indeed

[copponex]

But, Señor Llamazares is a Commie

Fortunately for him he lives in a society where you can formulate political opinion from a variety of sources and not resort to a childish game of name calling and vague nonsensical grandstanding. In many parts of the world, you can call yourself a communist or a marxist or a socialist and then have a discussion about what that means.

Stateside, I bet many people would consider calling the police. But such is the state of our populace: hysterical cowards and uneducated drones, ready to plead fealty to whatever entity promises them the most convenience and security.

Re:Indeed

[Tynin]

Please show me a society in which no participant has any desire for power, money, or both. Capitalism isn't great, but Communism has only served those who've used it to gain power and money.

There are many small communities based off the idea of communism, and they seem to be working well enough. Here is a larger community that seems to pull off the idea pretty well. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainbow_Family My sister in law was involved with the Rainbow Family for many years and generally lived a simple life of working and providing for each other in the community. Not everything thinks of only money and power at the end of the day, just most people it seems.

Re:Indeed

[dgatwood]

The same can be said for capitalism. Indeed, all economic systems inherently favor those who exploit flaws in the system to gain power and money or goods. Even the barter system. Short of having so much abundance that everyone's needs are fully met, there will always be people who are willing to abuse the system for personal gain. It's not even clear that this would go away even with such abundance.

Power attracts the corrupt and the corruptible. All economic systems require someone to have power to maintain order the system, whether it's the judges in a tribal barter system, the leaders of Russia's communist party, the heads of corporations, etc. Therefore, abuse of any economic system is guaranteed, given sufficient time.

Re:Indeed

[wizardforce]

Where people know each other and are in a group where there is significant trust involved then Communism might be viable to a degree but the problem is that a lot of people mistakingly extend the concept to large, inhomogeneous groups that are nothing of the sort. Small groups sure, whole countries? No.

Re:Indeed

[dunkelfalke]

Oh, that wasn't the only reason. Add trade embargoes, cold war, foreign intervention and so on - every time a communist country emerges suddenly half of the world tries to destroy its political and economical base.

Re:Indeed

[paeanblack]

not that it can work on the scale of a country...

No pure ideology works on the scale of a modern country (pop > ~1,000,000)

Pure democracy doesn't work for anything larger than Ancient Athens. Democracy still has pretty good ideas that are worth implementing in a system to govern a large populace. Communism is the same thing.

Just because the US was in a 40-year penis-waving battle with a country that claimed to be communist doesn't mean anything. Open Source certainly borrows much of its core ideology from communism. Linux, Firefox, Apache, etc all seem to be working quite well for me.

You see the same thing with Socialism. "La-la-la, health care, Obama, socialism, I can't hear you!". We've had socialist fire protection service in the US for 200 years. Everybody pays, everybody is covered, and that works much better than the alternative systems of the past.

Communist. Democratic. Socialist. Capitalist. Fascist. Republican. Anarchist.

Why worry about the labels? Take the best ideas from all of them and mix them to make a system that works.

Re:Indeed

[CharlyFoxtrot]

Our populace has many kinds of idiots, including those that think the only reason communism has failed everywhere it's been tried is because the right people weren't in charge.

If you look at many communist states they grew spectacularly despite many abuses in the system. Russia under communism for instance grew from a pre-industrial backwater that got beat down by the Japanese to a world superpower that pushed back the german war machine. Cuba grew from a defacto US plantation colony into an independent state with an infant mortality rate lower than that of the US. China became the workshop of the world under communism and the biggest US creditor holding USD 740 billion in U.S. debt. All 3 of these grew from dirt poor to states with good healthcare and education surpassing others in their region. To say they have "failed" is simplistic at best.

Re:Indeed

[jo42]

On this topic, my favorite saying goes like this: "In Capitalism, Man takes advantage of Man. In Communism, it is the other way around."

Re:Indeed

[Ethanol-fueled]

We've had socialist fire protection service in the US for 200 years.

So that's why fire trucks are red.

Re:Indeed

[GiveBenADollar]

Look at Russia. They went from a monarchy where the ruling class lived in luxury while the peasants lived as peasants. Then they moved to communism where the ruling class changed, but now they also controlled every aspect of society 'for the good of the people' while the workers lived as peasants. Then they changed to democracy. Wohoo. Now the ruling class was still living in luxury, the common citizens were still living in the same general conditions.

The problem comes when the ruling class in whatever form of government uses their power to keep themselves as the ruling class. In a monarchy you kill anyone who opposes you. In communism you kill anyone who opposes you and teach everyone why you are doing everything for their own good. In democracy you enact laws to keep yourself and your buddies wealthy and in positions of power.

Democracy != Capitalism that's the problem. Look at the RIAA for example. The free market and capitalism dictate that the RIAA should not exist anymore. Their market strategies are outdated, they overcharge for their product, and they tell the consumer what to purchase by controlling what reaches radio. They survive because they have laws enacted to protect their wealth. When people/companies use the government to be their strong arm to squash the competition everyone loses.

Out of all of this, only democracy gives the citizens a voice to change the ruling class, all other forms of government require revolution. And although much bad is said about capitalism, name me another system where at it's pure form the individual is rewarded for productivity and punished for laziness.

Re:Indeed

[Corbets]

No pure ideology works on the scale of a modern country (pop > ~1,000,000)

Pure democracy doesn't work for anything larger than Ancient Athens.

I dunno, it works pretty well over here in Switzerland, population somewhere between 7 and 8 million.

Re:Indeed

[Nathrael]

Fortunately for him he lives in a society where you can formulate political opinion from a variety of sources and not resort to a childish game of name calling and vague nonsensical grandstanding.

Heh, I wish.

Yes, it's completely true that communists (and all of them, including Stalinists) aren't inherently despised and feared here like they are in the US, and that they openly discuss their political believes without facing extremely strong opposition. In exchange, however, many people in many European countries despise neocons, strongly capitalist conservatives and libertarians (moderates and Ayn Rand-ite alikes) as "American scumbags" (or, if they are pro-military as well, "fucking Nazis"). "Free Speech? How could you *possibly* defend these racist fuckers? The government is right in censoring their hate speech!" Europe is just as extreme in many regards, it just has different "enemies" and acceptances.

Re:Wait, what?

[ccguy]

You must be American.

Sue the FBI

[iphinome]

Does the FBI own the rights to the image they're showing around? Aren't they violating copyright? Can't they be sued for millions in made up damages?

They used it in another picture as well!

[Anonymous Coward]

Something must be quite wrong when a forensic artist uses google images to find suitable features.

But it is even more worrying that they used Llamazare's features for another picture!

They took the Spanish PM's eyes and hair again for an image of a _different_ wanted terrorist:
http://www.elmundo.es/elmundo/2010/01/16/internacional/1263662696.html
http://www.rewardsforjustice.net/index.cfm?page=atiyah_abd&language=english

One wonders about the reliability of such wanted pictures, when it seems they serial produce them, cutting and pasting from the same image...

Re:They used it in another picture as well!

[md65536]

One wonders about the reliability of such wanted pictures, when it seems they serial produce them, cutting and pasting from the same image...

... unless they were looking for very general-looking features, that display a recognizable trait. They don't need to be precise to be reliable. Consider how we can recognize caricatures of celebrities from very stylized cartoon drawings.

But that makes it even more disturbing that they'd use a real and recognizable person, without his knowledge. It's not that his features matched exactly what they want, it's that they feel he has some generally useful features that can be used in a variety of composites. They're taking a person and turning him into clip art. Callous.

You wouldn't use pictures of yourself to make composites of wanted terrorists. You wouldn't use family or friends, or probably even a citizen of your country. But if you don't give a rat's ass about other people in the world, you can do whatever you want with an image of one without feeling a shred of shame. Worse yet, if there are people you don't like but you can't attack them with legitimate arguments, why not try to associate them with bigger enemies? What better way to do that than to use their image to create pictures of terrorists? You could implicitly say "Here's you as a terrorist" while explicitly saying "The image was used randomly for its general features and is not meant to be identified with the original subject."

It's outrageous, egregious, preposterous.

coincidence?

[malp]

You know I've never seen Bin Laden and this Gaspar Llamazares fellow in the same place at the same time. Just saying...

Baseless arguments

[bdrewery]

In other news, Ben Affleck apparently died in pakistan

Re:Fashion

[zach_the_lizard]

I have a feeling that he's in the US, probably even working in DC, laughing at how he has managed to be free for years. He probably is working at a StarBucks by the White House. It sure beats the hell out of the Afghanistan-Pakistan border region, and no one would suspect it.

FBI must be legally blind

[Dracos]

That guy doesn't represent what bin Laden would look like now. You can tell because:

• That guy looks nothing like bin Laden
• That guy doesn't look like he's been in a shallow grave for 8 years

Re:Wait, what?

[Eudial]

Ignorance and stupidity aren't exclusive American traits.

When it takes the form of McCarthyism, it invariably is.