Osama Bin Laden is dead.

[MrsSpringsteen]

Maybe OBL was just a technophobe loner

[ntalwar]

Originally Posted by MrsSpringsteen

Maybe OBL was just a technophobe loner

He communicated via satellite phone in the 90s, until he discovered it was traceable.

[deep]

Originally Posted by MrsSpringsteen

Maybe OBL was just a technophobe loner

twitter would have come in handy

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Originally Posted by financeguy

If you buy this piece of crap, you need your sweet little head examined.

The dollar is crashing, gold is at a all time high, there is fall-out from the Japanese nuclear explosions on the west coast of the USA, they just killed some kids in Libya, so, hey, how are we gonna take the minds of the sheeple off all of this? Oh, I know, let's kill (alleged CIA asset) Osama Bin Laden.

What a load of rubbish.

I call BULLSHIT.

would you be offended if i said i consider your thoughts on this to be absolute bat shit crazy, to the point where i am worried about your mental well being?

Originally Posted by Rachel D.

Exactly.

My first thought was, "Oh, how convenient." Just when Dear Leader needs a popularity boost. I wouldn't be surprised if they knew where he was for a long time and were saving him for a rainy day. And it's not like anything is going to change because of it.

ditto for you, too.

[popacrobat]

Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase

as more details come out there's one thing that bothers me about this entire thing...

here is the most wanted man on earth, a 6 foot 6 bearded man, living for months (at least) in a specially built compound in a town filled with pakistani military and retired military personnel...

and we're supposed to believe that the pakistani government didn't know he was there?

Abbottabad is essentially a military-cantonment city in Pakistan, in the hills to the north of the capital of Islamabad, in an area where much of the land is controlled or owned by the Pakistani Army and retired Army officers. Although the city is technically in what used to be called the Northwest Frontier Province, it lies on the far eastern side of the province and is as close to Pakistani-held Kashmir as it is to the border city of Peshawar. The city is most notable for housing the Pakistan Military Academy, the Pakistani Army’s premier training college, equivalent to West Point. Looking at maps and satellite photos on the Web last night, I saw the wide expanse of the Academy not far from where the million-dollar, heavily secured mansion where bin Laden lived was constructed in 2005. The maps I looked at had sections of land nearby marked off as “restricted areas,” indicating that they were under military control. It stretches credulity to think that a mansion of that scale could have been built and occupied by bin Laden for six years without its coming to the attention of anyone in the Pakistani Army.
The initial circumstantial evidence suggests that the opposite is more likely—that bin Laden was effectively being housed under Pakistani state control. Pakistan will deny this, it seems safe to predict, and perhaps no convincing evidence will ever surface to prove the case. If I were a prosecutor at the United States Department of Justice, however, I would be tempted to call a grand jury. Who owned the land on which the house was constructed? How was the land acquired, and from whom? Who designed the house, which seems to have been purpose-built to secure bin Laden? Who was the general contractor? Who installed the security systems? Who worked there? Are there witnesses who will now testify as to who visited the house, how often, and for what purpose? These questions are not relevant only to the full realization of justice for the victims of September 11th. They are also relevant to the victims of terrorist attacks conducted or inspired by bin Laden while he lived in the house, and these include many Pakistanis, as well as Afghans, Indians, Jordanians, and Britons. They are rightly subjects of American criminal law.

News Desk: Notes on the Death of Osama bin Laden : The New Yorker

[Headache in a Suitcase]

exactly.

[U2girl]

Originally Posted by popacrobat

News Desk: Notes on the Death of Osama bin Laden : The New Yorker

Fair enough...same goes for CIA, MI6 and all the other major secret servies.

[purpleoscar]

[Basstrap]

Today I was thinking about the inevitable conspiracy theories that will spring from these claims. Now, if someone were to say that the US is lying about this, then they would have to consider the other possibilities. And when considering these possibilities, weigh the risks to the Obama Administration with whatever is imagined would be gained from it.

1) Osama was killed in the caves of Tora Bora by bombing years ago. In this scenario, or ones similar to it, who recovered the remains? Seems most likely that it would have been those fighting around him. In which case, would the US make this recent claim knowing that someone out there has tangible proof to the contrary?

2)Osama died of kidney failure or typhoid. Again, this means there are people in possession of Osama's body who would probably immediately deny that he was killed by US forces, and would be able to display the evidence. Would Obama take that risk?

3)Osama was killed before this, by American troops, and kept "on ice" until a time deemed advantageous to the POTUS. In this case there probably would have been some witnesses unsympathetic to the US who would at least be coming forward to contradict the recent news. And what about the soliders involved in this hypothetical killing? Would the US trust them all enough to stick its head out to the world and claim to have killed Osama bin Laden?

Occam's Razor, guys.

Theorists who propose a great deceit in this news bear great responsibility to prove and provide significant evidence for it.

[Jeannieco]

Originally Posted by MrsSpringsteen

Here we go..so predictable. Bush better get credit, damn it.

Rumsfeld On Bin Laden: Obama 'Wisely' Followed Bush's Lead | TPM LiveWire

"All of this was made possible by the relentless, sustained pressure on al Qaeda that the Bush administration initiated after 9/11 and that the Obama administration has wisely chosen to continue," Rumsfeld wrote on Facebook.

Rumsfeld said that the controversial military detention center in Guantanamo Bay he helped establish "may have played an essential role in this success."

If Obama wanted to follow Bush's lead he would have bombed the crap out of the compound last year when they found out where he was with NO regard for the innocent calateral loss of life in the surrounding area.

This plan was genius on Pres. Obama's part and shows his smarts and patience. He and his advisors designed a plan that used finesse ( the incredible Navy Seals) in the dark of night to engaged him in a shoot out, direct on and the monster is dead.
End of story.

Hollywood must be chomping at the bit writing a script for the moive as we speak.

[deep]

Originally Posted by Basstrap

Today I was thinking about the inevitable conspiracy theories that will spring from these claims. Now, if someone were to say that the US is lying about this, then they would have to consider the other possibilities. And when considering these possibilities, weigh the risks to the Obama Administration with whatever is imagined would be gained from it.

1) Osama was killed in the caves of Tora Bora by bombing years ago. In this scenario, or ones similar to it, who recovered the remains? Seems most likely that it would have been those fighting around him. In which case, would the US make this recent claim knowing that someone out there has tangible proof to the contrary?

2)Osama died of kidney failure or typhoid. Again, this means there are people in possession of Osama's body who would probably immediately deny that he was killed by US forces, and would be able to display the evidence. Would Obama take that risk?

3)Osama was killed before this, by American troops, and kept "on ice" until a time deemed advantageous to the POTUS. In this case there probably would have been some witnesses unsympathetic to the US who would at least be coming forward to contradict the recent news. And what about the soliders involved in this hypothetical killing? Would the US trust them all enough to stick its head out to the world and claim to have killed Osama bin Laden?

Occam's Razor, guys.

Theorists who propose a great deceit in this news bear great responsibility to prove and provide significant evidence for it.

A combination of 1 and 3 would probaly be the one that would have the most chance of getting some traction.

It can go something like this. He was blown to bits at Tora Bora in early 2002. Not enough was left to identify him. But with the remains and DNA Bush/ Cheney knew they had him. (You may recall this was the original claim) The problem was with OBL dead there would be pressure to call it over. Cheney/Bush did not want to get out of Afghanistan. They had designs on a pipeline among other things. Cheney saw lots of opportunity for billions in Halliburton contracts. But, more importantly, Cheney had big plans for Iraq and needed OBL in the picture to gin up support for that huge sacrifice and billions in more Halliburton contracts. Therefore the premise for Iraq was a false claim of a 911 connection. This had to be out there to keep the American public on board for at least long enough to get it all started.

So as more time went on Obama became aware of the scam.
He had a choice to expose it, without any physical proof.
Or attack this compound with who ever was in there. Grab up some remains and claim a DNA match.



Interesting, the burial at sea leaves no remains for an independent corroboration.

[LuckyNumber7]

Originally Posted by Jeannieco

If Obama wanted to follow Bush's lead he would have bombed the crap out of the compound last year when they found out where he was with NO regard for the innocent calateral loss of life in the surrounding area.

This plan was genius on Pres. Obama's part and shows his smarts and patience. He and his advisors designed a plan that used finesse ( the incredible Navy Seals) in the dark of night to engaged him in a shoot out, direct on and the monster is dead.
End of story.

Hollywood must be chomping at the bit writing a script for the moive as we speak.

Okay come on now lets quit the Obama fanaticism and the Bush devilism.

[deep]

Originally Posted by Jeannieco

Hollywood must be chomping at the bit writing a script for the moive as we speak.

I hope they would do a two part mini-series much like they did with Carlos or Mesrine. OBL is an interesting person. The story did not begin on 9-11-2001 and end on 05-01-2011

[canedge]

No body is suspicious. And really killing someone is not justice. Even if he is a murderer himself.

[BoMac]

Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7

Okay come on now lets quit the Obama fanaticism and the Bush devilism.

I wouldn't hold my breath with this one.

[Basstrap]

Originally Posted by deep

So as more time went on Obama became aware of the scam.
He had a choice to expose it, without any physical proof.
Or attack this compound with who ever was in there. Grab up some remains and claim a DNA match.



Interesting, the burial at sea leaves no remains for an independent corroboration.

Yeah, that is very frustrating, and perhaps short-sighted. I have no doubt, however, that they took the time to gather evidence sufficient to convince most naysayers. Or at least, I hope so. I make it my business to actively oppose most conspiracy theories, and that can be an unpopular business amongst some of my friends. So, I really don't like it when government does something like dump the evidence in the sea! Of course, they are not thinking of - nor should they be - the implications in the conspiracy world.
There may be good reasons to bury Osama at sea, his body just might be a magnet for security threats

[deep]

Screenwriters get to work as Hollywood promises string of bin Laden movies - NYPOST.com

none of these sound very good.

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by Jeannieco

This plan was genius on Pres. Obama's part and shows his smarts and patience. He and his advisors designed a plan that used finesse ( the incredible Navy Seals) in the dark of night to engaged him in a shoot out, direct on and the monster is dead.
End of story.

this is quite true. stuff i'm reading shows how engaged Obama was in this whole thing. obviously, the SEALS deserve the lionshare of the credit, but they were backed by a focused, informed, prepared president. and i don't mean that in comparison to Bush -- much of this may have to do with timing, luck, etc. -- but i mean that as an independent evaluation of Obama and how he is conducting the GWOT.

i would lie, though, if i didn't admit to worrying a bit about reprisal attacks, living in DC.

Hollywood must be chomping at the bit writing a script for the moive as we speak.

right? i thought this too.

[The_Pac_Mule]

I won't lie, I got a lot of joy from hearing the news of his death this morning. My mom thought that all the celebrations in the street were a bit odd, which granted they kind of are, but I wouldn't expect anything else. It's not as much about his death, but more of the fact that "we got him." If he was captured instead of killed, we would probably be seeing the same sort of reactions. Even though a little of the patriotism being seen isn't actually genuine, it still is a little nice to see once in a while. Even if it's coming from drunken college kids.

Personally I'm glad he wasn't captured. The SEALs went in with the orders to "capture or kill" him, but the writing on the walls was definitely to kill. He wasn't going to surrender anyways, and even if he did, what's the point.

If he was captured, here's what would have to happen.

-He would need a trial. He doesn't deserve one.
-He would need a lawyer. Who in the hell is going to defend bin Laden?
-Ensuring security would be incredibly expensive.
-Then he would executed. Making the above pointless.
-Or, if he got life (He wouldn't), he wouldn't last a WEEK in any prison, I don't care how high the security is.

I wouldn't be surpised if he was actually subdued, and then executed. Although that appears less likely as they are saying he was shot twice in the head making it unrecognizable.

Burying his body at sea was a pretty smart move. It was done for several reasons:

A) No country would want to take his remains
B) Any country that did (Iran), would turn his grave into a shrine.
C) "In accordance with Islamic tradition," although thats just a little bullshit reason Obama's giving in hopes of making some Muslims happy. Fuck traditions.

And lastly, I'd like to say that Pakistan is pretty much fucked now, and nothing it's government says can be taken plausibly. I should be more pissed about it, but everyone knew it all along. It's one thing to say "oh he's not here, look somewheres else," but to say it when he's living in a million dollar mansion right next to the West Point of Pakistan.... they've lost all credibility.

I think I have more to say but that's all I can think of right now. Glad he's dead though. Finally.

[Irvine511]

so, for the sake of discussion, i've found this posted on Facebook, and think it's interesting and worthy of discussion:

Published on Monday, May 2, 2011 by TruthDig.com
On Osama Bin Laden’s Death
by Chris Hedges

Editor’s note: Chris Hedges made these remarks about Osama bin Laden’s death at a Truthdig fundraising event in Los Angeles on Sunday evening.

I know that because of this announcement, that reportedly Osama bin Laden was killed, Bob [Scheer] wanted me to say a few words about it … about al-Qaida. I spent a year of my life covering al-Qaida for The New York Times. It was the work in which I, and other investigative reporters, won the Pulitzer Prize. And I spent seven years of my life in the Middle East. I was the Middle East bureau chief for The New York Times. I’m an Arabic speaker. And when someone came over and told Jean and me the news, my stomach sank. I’m not in any way naïve about what al-Qaida is. It’s an organization that terrifies me. I know it intimately.

But I’m also intimately familiar with the collective humiliation that we have imposed on the Muslim world. The expansion of military occupation that took place throughout, in particular the Arab world, following 9/11 – and that this presence of American imperial bases, dotted, not just in Iraq and Afghanistan, but in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Doha – is one that has done more to engender hatred and acts of terror than anything ever orchestrated by Osama bin Laden.

And the killing of bin Laden, who has absolutely no operational role in al-Qaida – that’s clear – he’s kind of a spiritual mentor, a kind of guide … he functions in many of the ways that Hitler functioned for the Nazi Party. We were just talking with Warren about Kershaw’s great biography of Hitler, which I read a few months ago, where you hold up a particular ideological ideal and strive for it. That was bin Laden’s role. But all actual acts of terror, which he may have signed off on, he no way planned.

I think that one of the most interesting aspects of the whole rise of al-Qaida is that when Saddam Hussein … and I covered the first Gulf War, went into Kuwait with the 1st Battalion, 1st Marines, was in Basra during the Shiite uprising until I was captured and taken prisoner by the Iraqi Republican Guard. I like to say I was embedded with the Iraqi Republican Guard. Within that initial assault and occupation of Kuwait, bin Laden appealed to the Saudi government to come back and help organize the defense of his country. And he was turned down. And American troops came in and implanted themselves on Muslim soil.

When I was in New York, as some of you were, on 9/11, I was in Times Square when the second plane hit. I walked into The New York Times, I stuffed notebooks in my pocket and walked down the West Side Highway and was at Ground Zero four hours later. I was there when Building 7 collapsed. And I watched as a nation drank deep from that very dark elixir of American nationalism … the flip side of nationalism is always racism, it’s about self-exaltation and the denigration of the other.

And it’s about forgetting that terrorism is a tactic. You can’t make war on terror. Terrorism has been with us since Sallust wrote about it in the Jugurthine Wars. And the only way to successfully fight terrorist groups is to isolate themselves, isolate those groups, within their own societies. And I was in the immediate days after 9/11 assigned to go out to Jersey City and the places where the hijackers had lived and begin to piece together their lives. I was then very soon transferred to Paris, where I covered all of al-Qaida’s operations in the Middle East and Europe.

So I was in the Middle East in the days after 9/11. And we had garnered the empathy of not only most of the world, but the Muslim world who were appalled at what had been done in the name of their religion. And we had major religious figures like Sheikh Tantawy, the head of al-Azhar – who died recently – who after the attacks of 9/11 not only denounced them as a crime against humanity, which they were, but denounced Osama bin Laden as a fraud … someone who had no right to issue fatwas or religious edicts, no religious legitimacy, no religious training. And the tragedy was that if we had the courage to be vulnerable, if we had built on that empathy, we would be far safer and more secure today than we are.

We responded exactly as these terrorist organizations wanted us to respond. They wanted us to speak the language of violence. What were the explosions that hit the World Trade Center, huge explosions and death above a city skyline? It was straight out of Hollywood. When Robert McNamara in 1965 began the massive bombing campaign of North Vietnam, he did it because he said he wanted to “send a message” to the North Vietnamese—a message that left hundreds of thousands of civilians dead.

These groups learned to speak the language we taught them. And our response was to speak in kind. The language of violence, the language of occupation—the occupation of the Middle East, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan—has been the best recruiting tool al-Qaida has been handed. If it is correct that Osama bin Laden is dead, then it will spiral upwards with acts of suicidal vengeance. And I expect most probably on American soil. The tragedy of the Middle East is one where we proved incapable of communicating in any other language than the brute and brutal force of empire.

And empire finally, as Thucydides understood, is a disease. As Thucydides wrote, the tyranny that the Athenian empire imposed on others it finally imposed on itself. The disease of empire, according to Thucydides, would finally kill Athenian democracy. And the disease of empire, the disease of nationalism … these of course are mirrored in the anarchic violence of these groups, but one that locks us in a kind of frightening death spiral. So while I certainly fear al-Qaida, I know it’s intentions. I know how it works. I spent months of my life reconstructing every step Mohamed Atta took. While I don’t in any way minimize their danger, I despair. I despair that we as a country, as Nietzsche understood, have become a monster that we are attempting to fight.

Thank you.
© 2011 TruthDig.com

so, for me, it begs the question: what action can you take? was there any other option after 9-11 than retaliatory violence in some form? i think it's a bit patronizing to say that we "teach" people how to be violent. is the implication to do nothing? that can't be right, but i can't see dropping flowers on people who are dedicated to fiery death jihad. i am very much against the lionshare of Bush/Cheney foreign policy and i think they made the world less safe in so many ways, but certainly they had to do something, yes? what would this author suggest?