What are you suggesting? Are you saying it's because he would be an old frail man? Or that the name actually belongs to an entirely different body but for unexplained reasons this is being covered up?
If the government had released actual high res photos and videos of the body it would be clear that the 'fat osama' in the video above wasn't really him, and therefore that the only evidence that OBL was behind 9/11 was completely fabricated.
What makes you think they shot some fat guy, and not some skinny guy?
bonus tip: linking to youtube videos called "9/11 CONSPIRACY: THE BIN LADEN TAPE IS A FAKE!" marginalizes yourself, no matter the content.
Edit: seriously now. I'm not getting this. The public thinks that osama is tall and thin, regardless of whatever video bush was pointing at or whatnot. If they shot a tall thin guy, nobody would think anything of it (except perhaps the people that are predisposed to making "CONSPIRACY" videos on youtube...) If they shot some fat guy (which wouldn't even make sense to do, since the public doesn't recognize him as the guy...), then that should just match up with this apparent evidence video.... which is no big deal?
Explain this to me, if you are going to downvote me.
So why have they been publishing pictures of the skinny guy on a semi-regular basis for nearly a decade now, with no apparent shame? This whole thing makes no sense.
Bin Laden stopped publicly denying responsibility at least as early as 2004. You're free to disbelieve that but don't ignore it in your haste to convince others. You might find that it has the opposite effect from the one you intend.
And as I looked at those demolished towers in Lebanon, it entered my mind that we should punish the oppressor in kind and that we should destroy towers in America in order that they taste some of what we tasted and so that they be deterred from killing our women and children.
I do believe the 2004 video is real. However, there are two problems here. First, a video from 2004 inherently cannot be used as a reason for why we should have invaded Afghanistan in 2001. Second, if the December 2001 video was fake, that makes any further statements from OBL very suspect even if they are authentic. That is, any later statements made be OBL should be given much less weight as evidence against him. (In fact, in any trial that was actually fair the charges would be dropped if it was in fact determined that the U.S. had falsified evidence against him.)
Very confusing comment.