U.S. special forces ordered the destruction of Osama bin Laden's death photos two weeks after top secret seek and destroy mission to kill him

E-mail was obtained by the conservative activist group Judicial Watch

It orders special forces to turn on or destroy all pictures of the mission



But Judicial Watch claim order 'may have been in violation of the law'

A newly-released document has revealed that after the top secret mission to kill Osama bin Laden the head of U.S. special forces ordered all photos of his body be either turned in or destroyed.

The e-mail was sent by then-Vice Admiral William McRaven two weeks after the secret seek and destroy operation found the Al Qaeda leader.



A conservative campaign group which requested its release has claimed the e-mail, which is almost entirely redacted, 'may have been in violation of the law'.



Dated May 13, 2011, it said: '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.]'

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden, along with with members of the national security team, receive an update on the mission against Osama bin Laden in the Situation Room of the White House Osama bin Laden was killed in a special forces raid on his hideout in Abbottabad in Pakistan

CNN reports the e-mail was obtained by Judicial Watch, which has called for the public release of photos of the raid in Pakistan that killed the al Qaeda leader.

The e-mail, which was almost entirely redacted, was released under a Freedom of Information Act request.

Days before McRaven's instructions, Judicial Watch had filed a request for such photos, and hours before, they filed a lawsuit, according to the group's president, Tom Fitton.

'Despite there being multiple requests for this information, and a lawsuit for this information, there was a directive that was sent out, to who knows who, to destroy records,' he said. 'It may have been in violation of the law,' he said.

It is not clear whether any photos of bin Laden's remains were actually destroyed. Through a spokesman, McRaven declined to comment, CNN reported.

Retired General James 'Spider' Marks, a CNN military analyst, says if McRaven ordered photos deleted, he may have been trying to protect operational secrets, sources and methods and trying to make sure no commandos kept any photos or video of the covert raid that they were not authorized to keep.

U.S. Marines of Regiment Combat Team 1 watch TV as President Barack Obama announces the death of Osama Bin Laden

The hideout of Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden following his death by U.S. Special Forces in a ground operation in Abbottabad Found: An aerial view of the Abbottabad compound Bin Laden was hiding in

'It wouldn't be surprising if they shook them down, and they said 'OK, I want to make sure you don't have something that's hidden away someplace,' ' he said.

In the days after the raid, President Barack Obama said he would not authorize the release of any images of bin Laden's corpse, saying it would create a security risk.

'It is important for us to make sure that very graphic photos of somebody who was shot in the head are not floating around as an incitement to additional violence, as a propaganda tool,' the president told CBS news magazine '60 Minutes.'

People gather in Times Square New York shortly after the announcement from the President Obama announced that Al Qaida mastermind Osama bin Laden was dead and the United States has his body

Former FBI Assistant Director Tom Fuentes said he would have similar concerns if photos of the terrorist's body were made public.

'You would see those images forever on television,' he said. 'That could lead to more recruitment of future al Qaeda members, making him a martyr.'

Fitton is not persuaded by that argument.

'Americans' right to know about what their government is up to should be circumscribed because we don't want to offend terrorists and their sympathizers? That to me is unbelievable,' he said. 'This is a historic raid. People have a right to this information.'

But so far, the courts have not sided with Judicial Watch on that question, and the Supreme Court declined to hear the organization's appeal.