After Osama BIn Laden's Death III

knownothing wrote:

Who else thinks the US had these videos all along?

They have been in the can in case of emergency hit the glass. In other news the US is sinking into the abyss and Obama is being blamed. No connection there.

Bec.De.Corbin wrote:

As for him being unarmed and shot on the spot I really don't care; you'd think getting shot by a Special Forces unit kind 'a goes with the job of being a terrorist master mind/commander. That and considering all the shit he talked about jihad, martyrdom and fighting America the fact that he didn't have a weapon on him even when it took to SEALs 10 or 15 minutes to get to him kind 'a makes him look like a bit of a dumbass if you really think about it.

This attitude is typical of the U.S. gloat-fest now in progress. It's apparently quite acceptable to have one's military forces assassinating unarmed terror suspects, and it's their own stupid fault for not trying to shoot back.

The rule of law is completely out the window; the armed forces are judge, jury, and executioner. Everyone they kill deserves to die. No arrest, no charge, no evidence, no trial necessary.

If the government names someone as a terrorist, that's good enough reason to kill them. How exactly is this different from Nazi Germany?

Kai Wright wrote:

The gap between rhetoric and reality has long been a defining trait of American life. Lies about our values have shielded us from the brutal facts of our nation ever since we built it on the back of genocide and slavery. But it is in times like these that the dissonance becomes unbearable.

The president says we can do anything we want because we can kill. We could not stop poverty rates from spiraling upward to a record-setting 14.3 percent of Americans in 2009, but we can kill so we are exceptional. One in four black and Latino families live below the poverty line now, and as a result America’s child poverty rate—one in five kids—is the second worst among rich nations, behind Mexico. But we can kill, so we are great.

Fourteen million Americans are out of work, nearly a third of them for more than a year. The Depression-like jobs crises in black neighborhoods around the country have become so acceptable as to be literally unremarkable in national news media. When overall joblessness inched downward in March, the fact that black unemployment increased, again, was greeted with callous shrugs from the White House to CNN. But America is exceptional because we can kill.

Our economy is defined by greed. The top 1 percent of earners take home a quarter of income in this country. Wall Street banks are logging record profits while the Treasury Department professes helplessness at the fact that tens of millions of people are still losing their homes to those banks. Because of that foreclosure crisis, the stunning racial wealth gap—the typical black family has a dime for a dollar of wealth held by its white counterpart—will surely grow worse. The White House is paralyzed with inaction in the face of all of these challenges. But it can kill, so we are great.

We have the world’s most expensive health care system, and yet in 2009 infant mortality in the U.S. was higher than in 29 other countries and the worst among rich nations. Why? In large part because the infant mortality rate is so high among black and Latina women. We cannot find justice for them, but we can kill and call it justice.

We have a $14 trillion deficit. A massive giveaway to defense contractors lurks inside that number—a transfer of public funds that has been justified, in ways both explicit and implicit, by the evil visage of Osama Bin Laden. And now, Washington is as likely as not to make up the loss by taking apart the safety net that once created something like economic justice in America. But the president would like us to agree that we are great because we can kill.

[url=http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/05/02-11]Source[/url]

M. Spector wrote:

This attitude is typical of the U.S. gloat-fest now in progress.

I can understand you're bitterness but you're confusing unsympathetic indifference with gloating...

Bec-De.Corbin wrote:

As for him being unarmed and shot on the spot I really don't care; you'd think getting shot by a Special Forces unit kind 'a goes with the job of being a terrorist master mind/commander.

What about torturing information from bin Laden? Would he not have bin the absolute best source of intelligence on Qaeda terrorism ever? Maybe even a little kangaroo trial in the World Court to bolster a US-led phony globo war on terror? It would have been a news media extravaganza, and reporters quoting the king of terror's defence statements. He might even have talked about orchestrating 9/11 from the confines of his concrete bunker complex in the mountains of Tora Bora! Talk about golden opportunity!

I mean, sure they tortured Khalid Sheikh Mohammed for five years before finally extracting a confession from him. But in the end he did confess! Mind us, the information was all bogus anyway, and he admitted to leading them on wild goose chases, but KSM did admit that he lied his head off in telling them what they wanted to hear in order that they stopped torturing him. Five year's worth of torture? I think I'd have cracked in the first five minutes. KSM must have received some kind of special forces army training in preparation for terrorist duty in Afghanistan, or something, to have endured torture for that long, by gum!

I'll bet the US Military simply decided that torture would not work on OBL either. Afterall, they trained him in the black arts of terrorism, guerilla warfare and torture, too. He'd likely have known all their tricks anyway.

I think that's why they killed Elvis bin Laden instead of capturing him alive. He wouldn't have been a good source of intelligence on gladio terrorism anyway. His former employers knew just about everything he did and prolly more. A lot more.

This seems to be a widely-held view.

Quote:

Bin Laden had apparently been in a safe house near the Pakistan military academy for six years. Nobody believes this could have happened without the knowledge of senior intelligence officials. A meeting with one such person in 2006, which I recounted in my last book on Pakistan, confirmed that Bin Laden was in the country and being kept safe. The person concerned told me the Americans only wanted Bin Laden dead, but that it was in Pakistan's interest to keep him alive. In his words: "Why kill the goose that lays the golden eggs?" – a reference to the billions in aid and weaponry being supplied to the army. At the time I wasn't sure whether my informant was fantasising to amuse or misinform me; he was obviously telling the truth.

Tariq Ali

What do you mean, "no proof?"  The USA does give Pakistan millions of dollars in military aid.

I mean no proof that Osama was there in Pakistan compound yet

Bin Laden compound turned into a video game.

It's all about making money for corporate America. And Bin Laden dead, or announced as dead, is more valuable than alive.

That's capitalism for ya.

Fidel wrote:

The authenticity of this interview, which is available in recognized electronic news archives, is confirmed.

This "interview" has been floating around the web for some time now, but I have yet to find a non-conspiracy-theorist source for it.

Excerpts from it have also been described as a "letter to the Pakistani people" in a [url=http://general.mtstars.com/271043.html]purported official CIA transcript[/url]. Which was it? A letter or an interview? Has anyone seen an actual image of the CIA document?

Who exactly was it that "confirmed" the authenticity of this interview/letter?

Thanks, Fidel.

There are two separate things here. First, the [url=http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/16/inv.binladen.denial/]September 17, 2001 report from CNN[/url] quoting from an Al Jazeera item in which bin Laden clearly denies having anything to do with 9/11. Assuming the communication to Al Jazeera was genuinely from bin Laden, this CNN report is credible, because a) CNN would have no interest in publishing a falsehood that [b]absolves[/b] bin Laden of responsibility, and b) CNN has not withdrawn, qualified, corrected, or amended the report in the intervening years. Whether bin Laden was telling the truth to Al Jazeera is another question altogether.

Second, there is the later purported interview in the Pakistani Urdu-language newspaper [i]Ummat[/i] published on September 28, 2001. If it was ever published in English by the BBC, it is no longer on the BBC website.

It seems to me that the skepticism that is applied to the authenticity of bin Laden videotapes ought to be applied equally to written statements and reports - or even more so, since written reports and documents are much easier to fake than videos. I don't trust what I read in the [i]National Post[/i]; why would I trust [i]Ummat[/i] more?

I don't know what to believe. I am troubled by the lack of primary source evidence and the anonymity of the journalists involved in the CNN and Ummat reports. Quite apart from the [b]authenticity[/b] of the statements, they are self-serving and exculpatory, and worthy of skepticism as to their [b]credibility[/b] on that account alone.

Trust no one. That's my motto as well. 

Someone said recently that OBL could even have been captured alive and is being tortured for information before his execution. Who knows? We can be somewhat sure that: 1. he was dead, 2. is recently dead, or 3. is soon to be dead. No trial at the Hague or World Court Sobodan Milosevic style for certain. They almost botched that one when Milosevic was said to be winning his trial and then died suddenly.

It could be that ALL of the alleged bin Laden communiques are false. Or perhaps the US Military and CIA have been telling the truth all along, which I think is highly unlikely and especially without full disclosure to the public. I don't think we'll ever know for sure and not without a real commitment to government transparency and accountability to the public. A long period of glasnost is in order if they want to come clean. I guess they feel they have to speak to the public the odd time about covert operations, and this is one of those few times. Whether the donkey or elephant party wins the next election will mean nothing to this or very many issues. Central Asia and bin Laden is a bipartisan covert affair since the late 1970s. One accuses the other and vice versa, and it's all at arm's length from cosmetic government for the purpose of plausible deniability as usual.

Cont'd from the Common Dreams article above"

Quote:

The United States' 900-pound gorilla act might go over better if we weren't a nation that constantly prattles on and on about how civilized we are, how important it is that everyone follow the rules. For example:

"We're a nation of laws!" Obama recently exclaimed. "We don't let individuals make their own decisions about how the laws operate."

He wasn't talking about himself. This was about PFC Bradley Manning, the soldier accused of supplying the big Defense Department data dump to WikiLeaks. Manning has been subjected to torture including sleep deprivation and forced nudity-treatment ordered by Obama.

Truth is, the Constitution, our treaty obligations and our stacks of legal codes are worthless paper. We're not a nation of laws. We're a nation of gun-toting, missile-lobbing, drone-flying goons.

"Gun-toting, missile-lobbing, drone-flying goons"? Is he talking about the Flyers and Bruins or USA in general? I think that description is accurate and will be making it a macro to save keystrokes in future.

[url=http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/mike-friends-blog/some-final-thoughts-... Moore's[/url] paean to the death squad assigned to assassinate bin Laden:

Michael Moore wrote:

Last week, President Obama fulfilled a campaign promise and killed Osama bin Laden. Well he didn't actually do the killing himself. It was carried out by [b]a very brave and excellent team of Navy SEALs[/b]. ...

The official story from the Pentagon changed four times in the first four days! It went from OBL firing on the troops with one hand and using his wife as a human shield with the other, to, by the fourth day, [b]not single person in the main house, including bin Laden, being armed when killed[/b]. ...

These SEALs are trained to follow orders. I don't know what their orders were that night in Abbottabad, but it certainly looks like a job (and this is backed up in a piece in the Atlantic) where they were told to not bring bin Laden back alive. The SEALs are pros at what they do and they [b]instantly took out every adult male (every potential threat) within a few minutes[/b] - but they also took care to not harm a single one of the nine children who were present. Pretty amazing. This wasn't some Rambo-style operation where they just went in guns blazing, spraying bullets. They acted swiftly and with expert precision. ...[emphasis added]

Then he goes on to talk about how his "spiritual beliefs" don't allow for capital punishment! What a fucking hypocrite he is!

[url=http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/05/12/congress.bin.laden.photos/?hpt=T2]More lawmakers want photos of bin Laden's body released[/url] CNN

Quote:

Nelson, a Democrat who is a senior member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said in a news release, "I've said already that I agree with President Obama's decision not to release these pictures right now. Satisfying skeptics and conspiracy theorists isn't worth inflaming radicals or putting our troops in even more danger."
But "I personally believe the free flow of information is tantamount to our democracy. Thus, these pictures should eventually be made part of the public record."

Pandering to skeptics isn't worth endangering the lives of US troops. Apparently they've been shown real photos of the actual evidence this time. Or at least,  this is what they claim. This is becoming as dicey as an X-Files.

They could show us the real photos if'n they wanted to. But they don't wanna. I wonder what the real reason is?

Hear-hear! We need some democracy soon.

With "Geronimo" now dead, the frontier will open up for the expansion of the West into "Indian country" by the Zionist-US long knives.

Alexander Cockburn wrote:

Pinko terror-symps and the “rule of law” gang  may cavil and whine at the lack of legal propriety in the execution of Osama , but it’s not cutting much ice with liberal America.  For long years what might be called the “progressive” segment of American voters have chafed at Republican gibes that their guy Obama is a wimp, all the more irritably because deep down many of them thought the charge had some merit.

But now the former professor of constitutional law is really and truly an American. He’s flashed his  long, long Cadillac of a birth certificate, not merely the unconvincing shorty going the rounds for years. Better still, he has cojones.  Bigger cojones than those of  George Bush, who said that the capture of Osama was of no interest to him. Obama didn’t task the Navy SEALs: “if Osama shows no sign of resistance, it is your duty under Rules of Engagement to bring him home alive to face a fair trial.” No. He said “Make sure it’s Osama, then kill him.”

We have Senator Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma to thank for making Osama’s [sic!] orders clear. In an interview with CNN’s Eliot Spitzer he described the photographs, thus far denied the American people but available to members of Congress.
Inhofe:

“Three of the first 12 pictures were of Osama when he was alive. And they did this for the purpose of being able to look at those and seeing the nose, the eyes and his relationship for positive identification purposes. And that was good.

“One of the shots went through an ear and out through the eye socket, or it went in through the eye socket and out - and then exploded. It was that kind of ordinance that it was. Now that caused the brains to be hanging out of the eye socket, so that was pretty gruesome...."

Line up Obama with his fellow assassins, from Eisenhower through Bush, and I believe he’s the most repellent of the bunch, down there with Woodrow Wilson. None of his rivals quite match the instinctive egotism that allows Obama effortlessly to affect the earnestness of a man taking the moral high road while executing a cynical program of electioneering-by-assassination.
Cynical but effective. The Republicans are in a state of total confusion and have no plausible candidate to run against Obama. The progressives are solidly behind their man.

[url=http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn05132011.html]Counterpunch[/url]

NDPP wrote:

Fidel wrote:

Hear-hear! We need some democracy soon.

NDPP

If you were serious, you would need to add the present president to the list - who has gone much farther than 'W' and co in expanding US warmaking and promises to go even farther. (With the complete cooperation of Canadian pols: 'learning from the best' judging from their enthusiasm for NATO, Libya etc)

'US Bill To Expand Pres. War Powers'

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/179618.html

Oh for sure. And Clinton's regime was instrumental in working with al-Qaeda to create militant Islamic bases in Bosnia and Macedonia in the late 1990s. Hashim Thaci is another of their drug trafficking war criminal partners in crime. They should all be in jail.