Breaking: Bin Laden dead

[Reserv*ir]

Confirmations are being made on the ol' Tely.
I can't get ahold of anything online yet, but reports are coming in that Bin Laden has been killed by U.S. missile from about a week ago. They confirmed with DNA tests, apparently.

If truly true, this could be interesting...

Obama's set to make a statement "soon"

[Illidan]

Bin Laden is dead, sources say (http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/05/01/bin.laden.obit/index.html?hpt=T1&iref=BN1)

President's live announcement. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/42852646#42852646)

[Grunthos]

Be interesting to see where he was hiding, and how we finally got to him.

Bet you big money he wasn't in any cave. More likely living in luxury all these years.

[S Carver Orne]

Serendipity.

I'd like to know who - the exact person - dropped the bomb that killed him.

[sdhonda]

No. Some pulled a trigger.

President Obama finally delivers a speech worth listening to.

[Grunthos]

Now, let's get that fle-bitten goatfucker's whiskery head up on a muthafukin' PIKE in front of the WHITE HOUSE.

Breakin' out the Glenmorangie.

Just saw Obama's speech... twice as long as it needed to be, but he can't help himself.

Kudos to him, though... when it came time to have the trigger pulled, he didn't puss out and order a capture-at-any-cost.

He has finally achieved an accomplishment for which I am thankful for his effort.

[Reserv*ir]

Meanwhile, outside the White House (yes, this was posted by the AP itself; no, they didn't give context for this at all)
K5XVAugy_3I

[Grunthos]

There are apparently already those who want to know why we didn't capture him and bring him back for trial.

To them, I would explain, "Shut up."

4 helicopters, 40 minutes on the ground... and Osama's eldest son got to assume room temperature as well. nice bonus. Lost one helicopter to 'mechanical failure,' which bullets are known to cause.

Now, let's start taking down anyone we can prove knew he was there. Just have them disappear into the night.

[Agent Cay]

Part of me wonders if we haven't created a martyr.

Most of me says that any influence he has dead is nothing compared to the influence he had when he was alive, as the man who spat in the face of the U.S. and walked away.

This is so huge... we really, seriously got him. We GOT the son of a bitch.

[Reserv*ir]

Guaranteed this will have a great impact on events to come.
I've heard that security in some bas (http://www.jdnews.com/news/base-90693-bravo-condition.html)es (http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/14550975/army-raises-threat-level-at-installations) has been increased significantly.

We do need to be wary of future consequences. This could strain our relations with some Pakistanis that we're trying to work with, and there are still others in Al Qaeda out there looking to defeat the U.S. (and they may not need further 'assistance' from Bin Laden to do what they feel is necessary).
My gut says this isn't something we'll be celebrating for long.

[Dr. L]

Part of me wonders if we haven't created a martyr.

Most of me says that any influence he has dead is nothing compared to the influence he had when he was alive, as the man who spat in the face of the U.S. and walked away.

This is so huge... we really, seriously got him. We GOT the son of a bitch.

Bombed him on the shitter.


JFSlYyK1G2Q

[Edmaster]

Seriously guys, you didn't have to go through the trouble of gift-wrapping it!

[Tonus]

Part of me wonders if we haven't created a martyr.
I'm sure that this will be the view of many, not just within radical Islamic circles. And yes, we probably "created a martyr" in the sense that efforts to 'avenge' his death will likely ramp up for a short time, and any terror attacks that are carried out will be claimed as revenge. Even if they were attacks that would have been carried out anyway.

Of course, to any who would claim him as a martyr, I would remind them that this is the result of thousands of martyrs that he and his organization created when they planned and carried out terror attacks on Americans the world over, including those killed on 9/11. Sorry, but they don't get to have it both ways, carrying out terror attacks on innocent civilians, then claiming moral indignation when karma comes a calling.

This is not an act that occurs in a vacuum. Wondering if we've opened a can of worms is silly considering what Al Qaeda has done over the years, which includes repeated attempts at additional large-scale attacks over the past ten years. So the scenario is this: terror organization carries out numerous attacks, plans to carry out more, claims that it won't stop until you are all dead... then warns you not to harm them back, "or else."

And finally, our response was "or what, motherfucker?"

I hope they wrapped him in bacon before tossing him overboard.

[CyberKing]

Waste of good bacon. Use pig's feet.

[Nyarlathotep]

Coulda been sweeter speech —
http://i.imgur.com/IDsF2.gif




I'd like to know who - the exact person - dropped the bomb that killed him.
No. Some pulled a trigger.

Speech was plain, terrorists can blame Obama.

Servicemen are anonymous to mitigate retaliation. Though, some one is surely getting a promotion and choice of future assignments

[Illidan]

AP source: US used `multiple methods" to ID body

WASHINGTON – After the firefight that killed Osama bin Laden, the U.S. used "multiple methods" to positively identify his remains, according to a senior Pentagon official who personally saw a photograph of the corpse.

The official, who discussed the matter on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly, declined to specify the methods of identification, but two Obama administration officials said DNA evidence confirmed the death.

The officials claimed the DNA evidence provides a match with 99.9 percent confidence.

The officials did not immediately say where or how the testing was done but the test explains why President Barack Obama was confident to announce the death to the world Sunday night. Obama provided no details on the identification process.

The U.S. is believed to have collected DNA samples from bin Laden family members in the years since the 9/11 attacks that triggered the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan. It was unclear whether the U.S. also had fingerprints or some other means to identify the body on site.

Bin Laden was shot in the head during the firefight with members of an elite American counter-terrorism unit that launched a helicopter-borne raid on the al-Qaida leader's compound in Pakistan early Monday, U.S. officials said. Officials said the U.S. special forces who stormed the compound came face to face with their prey.

U.S. officials also said bin Laden was identified through "facial recognition," a reference to technology for mapping unique facial characteristics, but it was not clear exactly how the Navy SEAL troops performed the comparison.

The body was later taken to an American warship, but the senior Pentagon official declined to say which one and where the ship was situated.

The body was photographed before being buried at sea, although no images have been released by the Obama administration.

The U.S. official who disclosed the burial at sea said it would have been difficult to find a country willing to accept the remains. Obama said the remains had been handled in accordance with Islamic custom, which requires speedy burial.

Positive identification of the remains is considered a critically important part of the U.S. operation, given the symbolic importance of bin Laden's leadership of the Islamic extremist movement that was based in Afghanistan until the U.S. invaded in October 2001.

When al-Qaida's leader in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, was killed in a U.S. airstrike in June 2006, DNA tests were performed by the FBI to positively identify the remains. The U.S. military also performed an autopsy, in part to dispel allegations in the immediate aftermath of the airstrike that the terrorist leader had been beaten or shot by U.S. soldiers while in American custody.

It was not clear Monday whether the Obama administration intended to release its photos of bin Laden's body.

In July 2003, when U.S. forces killed Saddam Hussein's sons, Odai and Qusai, in a gunbattle in northern Iraq, the U.S. military released graphic after-death photographs in an effort to prove to Iraqis that they were dead. Two of the photos showed the first man, identified as Qusai, with bruises and blood spots around his eyes. That face was far more intact than the other, identified as Odai; the mouth was open with the teeth showing.

Source (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110502/ap_on_re_us/us_bin_laden_dna)

[S Carver Orne]

Last night news outlets reported he was killed a week ago during a bombing run. News today reporting he was killed yesterday by a single shot to the head by Navy SEALS led by the CIA. They confirmed his identity via DNA and then buried the body at sea at around 2 am EDT.

1.) DNA. Don't you need to have some to compare it? How did they have a goat herder type person's DNA?

2.) Buried at sea less than 24 hrs after being killed. Wat. I know their story "We don't want his grave to be a Mecca," but you'd think they'd refrigerate it, take it back to the US, then determine what to do with it further. Sounds extremely shady to me.

3.) Black hawk helicopter crashed because there was no uplift. The walls of the compound prevented air from being under the rotors, or something. So it crashed, and then they blew it up some more before they left.

I bet there's gonna be a lot of funny Bin Laden's dead pictures on the internet very soon.

Edit: Illidan posted. DNA "believed" to have been collected via his family. Still seems meh.

[Tonus]

IMO, there wasn't much to gain by keeping the body in a morbid attempt at proving that it was him. Even displaying the body would have led to charges of it being a fake, it not really looking like him, etc. ID him to the satisfaction of the administration, tie him to a rock, and tip it overboard. Let the conspiracy theorists have at it, there will always be people who won't believe it. Why bother trying to convince them?

The notion of adhering to Muslim burial custom is just cover. It's kind of silly to admit that you popped a cap in his skull and then decided to respect his religious beliefs (especially since he's part of a group that has perverted those same beliefs). Better to dispose of the body and leave it at that.

It's actually a lot easier to do it that way with Obama in the White House. Had Bush announced "we killed him, ID'ed him, and tossed him" a lot more people would have been suspicious. But Obama isn't seen as a guy who was in a hurry to put this particular feather in his cap, especially after all of the outreach to the Islamic community that he has done. I honestly don't think that he'd want to make this announcement until he was 101% sure that they got the guy.

[S Carver Orne]

I wonder, had they honored Islamic burial rituals or whatever, would he have been rewarded by Allah with his virgins? Anybody know, or do I have to dig out the koran?

[Dr. L]

I wonder, had they honored Islamic burial rituals or whatever, would he have been rewarded by Allah with his virgins? Anybody know, or do I have to dig out the koran?

Well, he forgot to go out stabbing the eagle in the eye, so he'll likely get one semi-virgin, one order of Mcnuggets, and seventy cuttlefish.

[sdhonda]

I think he'll be joining his former comrades:

http://www.theonion.com/articles/hijackers-surprised-to-find-selves-in-hell,1445/

[S Carver Orne]

News reported that they did indeed give him proper Islamic burial preparation and rites. In other news, PC is bullshit.

[KB.]

Edit: Illidan posted. DNA "believed" to have been collected via his family. Still seems meh.

He has several family members in the US. That has been known for quite sometime. I believe the DNA taken was from a dead sister/aunt.

The Russians didn't wait for Hitler to get cold before the cremated him and tossed his ashes out into the forest. Of course people still think he is running around in Argentina. Most conspiracy theories are just that, theories.

[Tonus]

News reported that they did indeed give him proper Islamic burial preparation and rites.
That's just so bizarre. "Hey guys, we found Bin Laden's hideout. Take him out with extreme prejudice and make sure he's dead so that I can dance on his grave in my victory speech. But, oh! Don't forget to treat his festering, bullet-riddled corpse with the proper respect-- we wouldn't want to antagonize any Muslims out there!"

[Grunthos]

Double-tap, left side of cranium. The Seal Team Six 'good night Irene' treatment.

Was deep-sixed off the Carl Vinson, supposedly.

Head should still be on a pike, but whatever.

[Illidan]

Some details on the OBL photos (http://whitehouse.blogs.cnn.com/2011/05/03/even-more-on-the-photos/)

A Senior US Official tells CNN 10 hard drives, 5 computers and more than 100 storage devices which includes discs, DVDs and thumb drives were taken from the compound.

The senior us official also says the White House received 3 sets of photos yesterday. The photos included:

1. Photos of OBLs body at a hanger after he was brought back to Afghanistan. This is the most recognizable with a clear picture of his face. The picture is gruesome because he has a massive open head wound across both eyes. It’s very bloody and gory.

2. Photos from the burial at sea on the USS Carl Vinson. Photos of OBL before the shroud was put on and then wrapped in the shroud.

3. There are photos of the raid itself that include photos of the two dead brothers, one of OBLs dead son (adult adolescent, maybe approx 18 yrs old) and some of the inside scene of the compound.

The official says the challenge is that the picture that includes the most recognizable image of OBLs face – from the hangar in Afghanistan – is so gruesome and mangled its not appropriate for say the front page of the newspaper. On the other hand, this is the one that is most identifiable as him.

Pakistan says had no knowledge of U.S. bin Laden raid (http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/03/us-binladen-pakistan-statement-idUSTRE74242R20110503)

Pakistan on Tuesday denied any prior knowledge of the U.S. raid that killed Osama bin Laden, but said it had been sharing information about the targeted compound with the CIA since 2009.

Pakistan has faced enormous international scrutiny since bin Laden was shot dead by U.S. Special Forces in an attack on a sprawling compound near a military academy in the northwestern town of Abbottabad early on Monday.

While Islamabad hailed the killing of bin Laden as an important milestone in the fight against terrorism, the foreign ministry said Pakistan had expressed "deep concerns" that the operation was carried out without informing it in advance.

"Neither any base nor facility inside Pakistan was used by the U.S. forces, nor the Pakistan Army provided any operational or logistic assistance to these operations conducted by the U.S. forces," the ministry said in a lengthy statement.

"This event of unauthorised unilateral action cannot be taken as a rule," it added.

[Tonus]

Cindy Sheehan weighs in: (http://www.facebook.com/cindyssoapbox/posts/128596820550958)

I am sorry, but if you believe the newest death of OBL, you're stupid. Just think to yourself--they paraded Saddam's dead sons around to prove they were dead--why do you suppose they hastily buried this version of OBL at sea? This lying, murderous Empire can only exist with your brainwashed consent--just put your flags away and THINK!

And yes, this is provided for the comedic value, such as it is. The benefit of having someone as unhinged as Sheehan propose the "fake body" theory this early is that fewer people may be willing to jump on a bandwagon that she is pulling.

[Grunthos]

Sheehan can only exist due to the generally benign nature of this "lying, murderous empire." She should try her opposition act in the land of a true despot. Would do us all a favor. It's a pity she wasn't cozied up to Osama at the time.

Nonetheless, she' not the only one who has pointed out the error in the whole "burial at sea" scheme. It was obvious, and predictable from the start.

Head on a pike, would be no problem; the only people who would whine would be pantywaist peaceniks anyway, and they are by definition no threat.

[S Carver Orne]

Florida Sen. Bill Nelson accused of political opportunism in wake of Osama bin Laden’s death

Democratic Senator Bill Nelson of Florida, while discussing a voting bill in his home state, took the opportunity to tie in the death of Osama bin Laden.

Nelson commented that if Republican lawmakers in Florida succeed with a voting bill currently making its way through the state legislature, the very same military members who helped kill bin Laden could be kept from voting.

“Should we deny those very military that carried out this very successful decapitating of the Al Qaeda snake, should we deny them because they have signed their voter registration card in a different than they signed their absentee ballot overseas?” said Nelson. Those comments did not go unnoticed by state lawmakers or national (http://www.politico.com/blogs/davidcatanese/0511/Nelson_ties_bin_Laden_operation_to_voting_bill.htm l?showall) and local (http://www.sunshinestatenews.com/story/bill-nelson-gop-wage-ballot-war-wake-bin-laden-assassination) media, who have been largely critical of the remarks.

When contacted by The Daily Caller, Dan McLaughlin, spokesperson for Nelson, dismissed the coverage of the Senator’s remarks as being from “political partisans and extremists.”

“Such remarks are intended to deflect attention from the fact that the voting bill in Florida is widely acknowledged to be a conniving way to restrict access to lots of Floridians,” said McLaughlin.

When asked to clarify the comments, McLaughlin simply said the senator “contrasted having Americans fighting for the democratic rights of people in other countries to the efforts in Florida to restrict one of the most basic rights – one person, one vote.”

Among other things, the bill in question contains a requirement that absentee ballots be signed in the same way as voter registration cards. For Republicans, the measure cracks down on voter abuse. For Democrats, it restricts voting rights.

Nelson went on to compare the fight for democracy against terrorism to the fight for democracy by voting down the bill.

“Now in an effort of 10 years, ever since Sept. 11, 2001, protecting our democracy, protecting us from those that would do harm and who provide this protection because our democracy is unique, we find ourselves gathered in our Capitol city of this state again here to protect our democracy,” said Nelson. “Now we are here for another reason of protecting our democracy and that is to keep the right to vote.”

Florida Republicans almost immediately pounced on Nelson’s comments. Dave Bitner, Republican Party of Florida chairman, House Majority Leader Carlos Lopez-Cantera, and Senate President Mike Haridopolos all condemned the comments and demanded an apology.

Haridopolos, who is a candidate in the Republican Senatorial primary to challenge Nelson in 2012, accused the senator of “comparing pending legislation to a terrorist organization that has killed thousands of people.”
http://dailycaller.com/2011/05/03/florida-sen-bill-nelson-accused-of-political-opportunism-in-wake-of-osama-bin-ladens-death/

I've personally corresponded with Bill Nelson. I'd like to say he's a wingnut, but he's actually lucid. He is, however, conceited and an opportunist. The above reflects it, n'est-ce pas?

[Srsly Niipah]

I'm kind of disgusted at all the people that are celebrating his death. It's sad that a nation which supposedly consists of 75%~ christians (a religion based on grace and forgiveness), is so filled with hatred for one man that they would behave in such a way. It'd be understandable to give a sigh of relief, however openly cheering and jumping for joy is pretty sickening.

[Tonus]

Well, I didn't fist-pump or high-five anybody, but I'm pretty happy that they put some lead in his skull. A mass-murderer who patted himself on the back when his dupes helped kill thousands of people? And whose only regret is that he couldn't get the rest of us as well? Yeah, I'm pretty glad that he's just a rotting lump on a seabed somewhere. I have no problem with people metaphorically spitting on his grave.

I have no problem with people who prefer to keep it low-key or don't want to express joy at the suffering or death of another human being. I also have no problem with people who are cheering it, because I think that our actions, and the way we live our lives, is a pretty important dividing line between human beings. He may have been a person, but he sure wasn't like the rest of us.

[CyberKing]

He didn't knock down your country's towers.

[Srsly Niipah]

He didn't knock down your country's towers.

I live almost as close to new york as you do.

[Shady]

I live almost as close to new york as you do.

So? What's that got to do with it?

Some Americans are experiencing closure that you don't understand. Has nothing to do with how close in proximity to NY you live.

[Grunthos]

I'm kind of disgusted at all the people that are celebrating his death. It's sad that a nation which supposedly consists of 75%~ christians (a religion based on grace and forgiveness), is so filled with hatred for one man that they would behave in such a way. It'd be understandable to give a sigh of relief, however openly cheering and jumping for joy is pretty sickening.

The post seems to demonstrate a shocking lack of empathy, by accusing people of displayng a shocking lack of empathy.

Trying to drag Christianity into it, when the original heinous deed was done using religious extremism as a lever, is even more involuted.

I'm surprised it didn't vanish into a wormhole as soon as it was written.

[Grunthos]

Oh, and a sidenote; Obama's administration is setting new levels of snatching a strategic defeat from the jaws of a tactical victory every time one of his people opens their pie-hole... and the One ends up contradicting them.

Osama armed... then not armed.
Human sheild... then no human shields.
Firefight... then no resistance from within compound.
Osama's wife dead... and then undead.
We have the body... but will do nothing to prove we ever had the body, beyond saying we did.
Panetta says the pictures would come out... then Obama says, "no pictures; might make Muslims mad."
Obama says in his speech that Osama was no Muslim, was instead a mass murderer of Muslims... then insists on a 45-minute muslim burial ceremony at sea for the non-Muslim... which other Muslim scholars say was not halal after all.

Good thing the hitters on this job weren't as eaten alive with equivocation... they'd've never been able to start the helcopters.

[Srsly Niipah]

The post seems to demonstrate a shocking lack of empathy, by accusing people of displayng a shocking lack of empathy.

Trying to drag Christianity into it, when the original heinous deed was done using religious extremism as a lever, is even more involuted.

I'm surprised it didn't vanish into a wormhole as soon as it was written.

There's a difference between religious extremism, and basic fundamentals. But whatever. Why should I feel guilty for noticing something that I feel is wrong?

[sdhonda]

I suspect the real reason for the burial at sea (which probably amounted to him being weighted down and kicked overboard after they got a positive ID) was to make sure there would be no shrine or anything, and to drive home that he is gone. The "muslim burial at sea" thing was just tagged on afterwards by someone in the Whitehouse for the speech.

[Shady]

There's a difference between religious extremism, and basic fundamentals. But whatever. Why should I feel guilty for noticing something that I feel is wrong?

It's an American thing, something you Canucks would never understand. Instead of worrying about what's going on down here in the real world, yall just keep up with the basic and fundamental actions (http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/02/canada-human-rights-tribunal-orders-womans-house-seized-after-she-said-muslim-employees-lunch-smelle.html) of your "Human Rights Tribunal."

[Srsly Niipah]

It's an American thing to revel in death like savages? It's not even just this, but I hear of similar incidents that disgust me. Such as the pictures that surfaced of military posing over murdered civilians like trophies.

All I'm saying is that statistics show that 75% of Americans are Christians. The terrorist act was was indeed committed by extremists, and that's not even relevant; however the basic foundations of Christianity doesn't leave room for hating other human beings (especially with the passion to celebrate their death). So I feel like I have every right to frown upon every 3 out of 4 Americans celebrating this.

[Straw]

It's an American thing to revel in death like savages?

Its more so just being happy that someone who coordinated such a disastrous attack that was the first big wake up call in a while can't coordinate anything else. Its like telling a holocaust survivor that he's a bad person for rejoicing in the death of Hitler.

[Reserv*ir]

Oh, and a sidenote; Obama's administration is setting new levels of snatching a strategic defeat from the jaws of a tactical victory every time one of his people opens their pie-hole... and the One ends up contradicting them.

Osama armed... then not armed.
Human sheild... then no human shields.
Firefight... then no resistance from within compound.
Osama's wife dead... and then undead.
We have the body... but will do nothing to prove we ever had the body, beyond saying we did.
Panetta says the pictures would come out... then Obama says, "no pictures; might make Muslims mad."
Obama says in his speech that Osama was no Muslim, was instead a mass murderer of Muslims... then insists on a 45-minute muslim burial ceremony at sea for the non-Muslim... which other Muslim scholars say was not halal after all.

Good thing the hitters on this job weren't as eaten alive with equivocation... they'd've never been able to start the helcopters.

:smith:
So do we (or, furthermore, will we ever) have a clear story of what happened over there, then? That's honestly really frustrating that we can't just get the real complete story stateside...
Maybe when the folks who did the deed come back safely (here's hoping) might we get the true details.....

[Tonus]

We will never get a full accounting and a clear story IMO. Operations like this probably rely on a good amount of information and tactics that are better off kept as secret as possible. And that means that some details have to be kept hidden or changed to protect people and knowledge.

That, and even for a trained group of badasses, the excitement, adrenaline levels and general mayhem from a situation like this ensure that they won't get all the details right. The story they tell minutes after the raid will likely have some very different details than the one they tell hours or days later, once the high has worn off and they've had time to replay it all in their minds.

Add in the usual bumbling that you get at the government level, and it's no surprise that the story is so garbled already. As more people weigh in, I'm sure it'll get more and more confused. And that might just be for the best.

[Shady]

So I feel like I have every right to frown upon every 3 out of 4 Americans celebrating this.

First, made up statistics are kind of against the posting guidelines of SD. You might want to find some documentation to back up your "3 out of 4 Americans" claim.

Second, I already said it's your right to disapprove of something you don't understand. The US set out 10 years ago to eliminate OBL. Americans are celebrating the success of that long and arduous mission. I imagine we would be seeing just as much celebrating had he been captured. Many are celebrating the idea that their loved may soon come home. Others are likely celebrating closure. Your assumption is that Americans are specifically reveling in the death of someone, rather than what that death means to the big picture of their lives and the future of this country.

Again, it's obvious you do not understand. Nobody expects you to. You have every right to judge, but it's kind of hypocritical to lay down a moral compass as a reason for judgment, when judging others in and of itself is against the very principles you are using to pass your judgment.

[Grunthos]

So I feel like I have every right to frown upon every 3 out of 4 Americans celebrating this.

Of course you feel that way... because you are sincere in your lack of empathy.

[Grunthos]

We will never get a full accounting and a clear story IMO. Operations like this probably rely on a good amount of information and tactics that are better off kept as secret as possible. And that means that some details have to be kept hidden or changed to protect people and knowledge.

That, and even for a trained group of badasses, the excitement, adrenaline levels and general mayhem from a situation like this ensure that they won't get all the details right. The story they tell minutes after the raid will likely have some very different details than the one they tell hours or days later, once the high has worn off and they've had time to replay it all in their minds.

Add in the usual bumbling that you get at the government level, and it's no surprise that the story is so garbled already. As more people weigh in, I'm sure it'll get more and more confused. And that might just be for the best.

I'd bet you high stakes indeed that any "bumbling" or "failure in recollection" that has taken place did not originate with that "trained group of badasses," but rather with their political masters.

List compiled by someone with far more time than I have:

Okay, what do we have here:

1) There was a firefight.
2) There was no firefight.
3) Bin Laden was “resisting.”
4) Bin Laden wasn’t armed. (Makes the concept of “resisting” interesting.)
[4.a) And the newest one: the SEALS thought bin Laden was reaching for a weapon.]
5) He used his wife as a shield.
6) His wife was killed too.
7) He didn’t use his wife as a shield. She ran at a SEAL who shot her in the leg, but she’s fine.
8 ) Some other woman — the maid? — was used as a shield. By somebody. Downstairs.
9) That other woman — downstairs — was killed.
10) Maybe not. She was killed unless she wasn’t — and who was she, anyway?
11) Bin Laden’s son was killed.
12) Unless it was some other guy.
13) Bin Laden’s daughter saw him get killed. She’s undoubtedly traumatized, poor dear.
14) They were going to capture Bin Laden until the problem with the helicopter, which was:

A) It had mechanical trouble
B) It did a hard landing
C) It crashed
D) It clipped a wall with a tail rotor, effectively a crash

15.) They were never going to try to capture him; it was always a kill mission.
16.) No, it wasn’t.
17) The chopper blew up.
18) The SEALs blew it up.
19.) Panetta said yesterday the world needed proof and the photo would be released.
20.) Obama said today in an interview he taped with Steve Kroft for “60 Minutes” to be broadcast Sunday that it won’t be released. It’s too gruesome, would offend Muslim sensibilities (something he worries about a lot — I personally do not give a warm fart on a wet Wednesday about Muslim sensibilities), and how would Americans feel if Muslims released pictures of dead Americans?
21.) Kroft — who’s not a total idiot — pointed out that ever since “Black Hawk Down” days, Muslims have been doing precisely that, filming American bodies being dragged through the streets, filming Daniel Pearl’s head being cut off, filming any and everything.
22) Obama gets pissed at CBS, the tape gets cleaned up, that question disappears. (Inside info.)
23.) We got a “treasure trove” of stuff from hard drives, etc.
24.) There were no phone lines, and no internet access at the “mansion,” they didn’t even have TV — what “treasure trove?”
25.) There is obviously in the pictures of the place a large satellite dish. I guess they used it for making salads.
26.) And now, just today: apparently the idea was to capture him, but only if he was naked. There was a suspicion he might be wearing a suicide bomber type explosive vest, or belt. So if he’s not naked and you can’t see if he has a vest on or not – shoot him.


:huh:

Oh, and that now-famous picture from the Situation Room where everyone is intently staring at a screeen out of frame? Well, today Pinetta 'admitted' that there was no live feed from the operation over the most crucial 25 minutes, where Osama was taken out... so what exactly were those people staring at?

Recalling Nixon's missing minutes of tape, at this point.

[Straw]

I'd bet you high stakes indeed that any "bumbling" or "failure in recollection" that has taken place did not originate with that "trained group of badasses," but rather with their political masters.

List compiled by someone with far more time than I have:


:huh:

Oh, and that now-famous picture from the Situation Room where everyone is intently staring at a screeen out of frame? Well, today Pinetta 'admitted' that there was no live feed from the operation over the most crucial 25 minutes, where Osama was taken out... so what exactly were those people staring at?

Recalling Nixon's missing minutes of tape, at this point.

There's an easy enough explanation. We blew up Osama years ago but the specific time we did is unknown. We wait for him to turn up behind another massive tragedy, which never happens. 10 years go by and he is assumed dead. We say there was a "top secret" mission in which we killed him, and no details can be released. The team of SEALS that apparently had a live feed doesn't take pictures to prove they killed a man who's head is worth $25 milion+ and dump his body into the sea asap to follow his religious tradition. If the assumption is dead, we have a story to tell how he died. If he comes on TV and says "hai wats up gaiz i'm alive lol", we just say it was a military tactic to find out where he actually is. What's confusing about that?

[Illidan]

Al Qaeda Confirms Bin Laden's Death

CAIRO — Al-Qaida on Friday confirmed the killing of Osama bin Laden and warned of retaliation, saying Americans' "happiness will turn to sadness."

The confirmation came in an Internet statement posted on militant websites, signed by "the general leadership" of al-Qaida. The announcement opens the way for the group to name a successor to bin Laden. His deputy Ayman al-Zawahri is now the most prominent figure in the group and is a very likely contender to take his place.

The statement, dated May 3, was the first by the terror network since bin Laden was killed Monday by U.S. commandos in a raid on his hideout in Abbottabad, Pakistan. The statement's authenticity could not be independently confirmed, but it was posted on websites where the group traditionally puts out its messages.

"The blood of the holy warrior sheik, Osama bin Laden, God bless him, is too precious to us and to all Muslims to go in vain," the statement said. "We will remain, God willing, a curse chasing the Americans and their agents, following them outside and inside their countries."

"Soon, God willing, their happiness will turn to sadness," it said, "their blood will be mingled with their tears."

There was no indication how the group will retaliate. Rather than making vehement cries of vengeance, the statement – entitled "You lived as a good man, you died as a martyr" – struck a tone of calmness and continuation. Though it included praise of bin Laden, much of the 11-paragraph statement was dedicated to underlining that al-Qaida would live on, depicting him as just another in a line of "martyrs" from the group.

"It is impossible, impossible. Sheik Osama didn't build an organization to die when he dies," the statement read. "The university of faith, Quran and jihad from which bin Laden graduated will not close its doors," it added.

"The soldiers of Islam will continue in groups and united, plotting and planning without getting bored, tired, with determination, without giving up until striking a blow," the statement.

It said bin Laden was killed "along an established path followed by the best of those who came before him and those who will come after him."

In the statement, al-Qaida also called on Pakistanis to rise up in revolt against its leaders to "cleanse the shame." It also said that an audio message bin Laden recorded a week before his death would be issued soon.

The writers of the statement appeared unaware of the announcement by American officials that bin Laden's body had been buried at sea. The statement warned against mishandling or mistreating bin Laden's body and demanded that be handed over to his family, saying "any harm (to the body) will open more doors of evil, and there will be no one to blame but yourselves."

Source (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/06/osama-bin-laden-dead-al-qaeda_n_858440.html)

[Tonus]

There was no indication how the group will retaliate.
Right, because Al Qaeda's modus operandi is so difficult to figure out.

[Grunthos]

Right, because Al Qaeda's modus operandi is so difficult to figure out.

When they are already trying their damnedest to harm us any way they can... exactly what form can 'retailiation' take?

[sdhonda]

http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20110502-bin-ladens-death-and-implications-jihadism

[Shady]

A deeper evaluation of the moral judgment over Americans celebrating the death of OBL...

How did ‘I hate bin Laden and I’m glad he’s dead’ become the most shocking thing one can say in polite society?

This week we have shuttled from an atmosphere of congratulation, even muted celebration, over the killing of OBL to what Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury and High Priest of the Chattering Classes, describes as a ‘very uncomfortable feeling’ about the killing of OBL. Those who dare to celebrate his death – mainly young American jocks – have been denounced as ‘abhorrent’ and ‘sickening’, and now the main way you advertise your decency, your membership of the civilised, upstanding, oh-so-unAmerican classes, is by wondering out loud if poor old OBL shouldn’t have been arrested and put on trial rather than having a bullet planted in his head.
[...]

The modern chattering classes are so utterly removed from the mass of the population, so profoundly disconnected from ‘ordinary people’ and their ‘ordinary thoughts’, that they effectively see happy Americans as a more alien and unusual thing than Osama bin Laden. Where OBL wins their empathy, American jocks receive only their bile.
[...]

Also, it is striking that many of the critics of Obama express concern about the alleged emotions behind American militarism – vengeance, Wild West fury, a lack of basic decency – rather than being concerned about the moral question of whether America should have the right to intervene in other states. It’s the sentiment they hate, more than the use of military force overseas per se.

No, the now widespread ‘uncomfortable feeling’ with the shooting of bin Laden is really an expression of moral reluctance, even of moral cowardice, a desire to avoid taking any decisive action or expressing any firm emotion that might have some blowback consequences for us over here. It is the politics of risk aversion rather than the politics of anti-imperialism...

Self-loathing and cowardice manifests in many different forms. This is yet another...

Read the full article here (http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/printable/10493/)

[Dr. L]

http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/nuclear-hellstorm-if-bin-laden-caught-911-mastermind/story-e6frfku0-1226044724298

Those are big threats. Nothing's come of it yet, but never underestimate a spanner in the works. God save them if they try.

[Shady]

Sheikh Mohammed is known to have undergone the method known as "waterboarding."

Only a couple hundred times though!

[Grunthos]

Once again, VDH gets right to the point:


May 6, 2011 4:00 A.M.

The First-Person Presidency
President Obama takes credit for operations that would have been impossible had Senator Obama’s views prevailed.

Here are a few excerpts from President Obama’s speech on Sunday night about the killing of Osama bin Laden.

“Tonight, I can report . . . And so shortly after taking office, I directed Leon Panetta . . . I was briefed on a possible lead to bin Laden . . . I met repeatedly with my national security team . . . I determined that we had enough intelligence to take action. . . . Today, at my direction . . . I’ve made clear . . . Over the years, I’ve repeatedly made clear . . . Tonight, I called President Zardari . . . and my team has also spoken. . .These efforts weigh on me every time I, as Commander-in-Chief . . . Finally, let me say to the families . . . I know that it has, at times, frayed. . . .”

Most of these first-person pronouns could have been replaced by either the first-person plural (our, we) or proper nouns (the United States, America). But they reflect a now well-known Obama trait of personalizing the presidency.

The problem of first-personalizing national security is twofold. One, it is not consistent. Good news is reported by Obama in terms of “I”; bad news is delivered as “reset,” “the previous administration,” “in the past”: All good things abroad are due to Obama himself; all bad things are still the blowback from George W. Bush.

Two, there is the small matter of hypocrisy. The protocols for taking out Osama bin Laden were all established by President Bush and all opposed by Senator and then candidate Obama. Yet President Obama never seeks to explain that disconnect; indeed, he emphasizes it by the overuse of the first person. When the president reminds us this week of what “over the years I’ve repeatedly made clear,” does he include his opposition to what he now has institutionalized?

Guantanamo proves to have been important for gathering intelligence; Barack Obama derided it as “a tremendous recruiting tool for al-Qaeda.”

Some key intelligence was found by interrogating prisoners abroad; Barack Obama wished to end that practice: “This means ending the practices of shipping away prisoners in the dead of night to be tortured in far-off countries, of detaining thousands without charge or trial, of maintaining a network of secret prisons to jail people beyond the reach of law.” “That will be my position as president. That includes renditions.” Renditions have not ended under Obama, but expanded.

In some cases we are trying suspects through military tribunals; here again, Barack Obama used to deplore the practice he now has adopted: “a flawed military-commission system that has failed to convict anyone of a terrorist act since the 9/11 attacks and that has been embroiled in legal challenges.”

Senator Obama complained about airborne attacks on the Afghanistan-Pakistan borderlands. President Obama increased Predator assassination attacks fivefold. He has killed four times as many terrorist suspects by Predators in 27 months than did President Bush in eight years.

In January 2007 — three weeks after President Bush announced the surge — Senator Obama introduced the “Iraq War De-escalation Act of 2007.” If it had passed, that law would have removed all troops from Iraq by March 2008. Obama derided the surge in unequivocal terms both before and after its implementation: “I don’t know any expert on the region or any military officer that I’ve spoken to privately that believes that that is going to make a substantial difference on the situation on the ground.” “Here’s what we know. The surge has not worked.”

Candidate Obama criticized warrantless wiretaps, in accusing the Bush administration in the harshest terms: “This administration acts like violating civil liberties is the way to enhance our security. It is not.” A disinterested examination of present policy regarding both wiretaps and intercepts would show no change from the Bush administration, or indeed considerable expansion of the use of these tools.

If one wonders why former President Bush did not attend ceremonies with President Obama this week in New York, it might be because of past rhetoric like this about policies Obama once derided and then codified: “I taught constitutional law for ten years at the University of Chicago, so . . . um . . . your next president will actually believe in the Constitution, which you can’t say about your current president.” George Bush did not believe in the U.S. Constitution?

In sum, Senator Obama opposed tribunals, renditions, Guantanamo, preventive detention, Predator-drone attacks, the Iraq War, wiretaps, and intercepts — before President Obama either continued or expanded nearly all of them, in addition to embracing targeted assassinations, new body scanning and patdowns at airports, and a third preemptive war against an oil-exporting Arab Muslim nation — this one including NATO efforts to kill the Qaddafi family. The only thing more surreal than Barack Obama’s radical transformation is the sudden approval of it by the once hysterical Left. In Animal Farm and 1984 fashion, the world we knew in 2006 has simply been airbrushed away.

Times change. People say one thing when they are candidates for public office, quite another as officeholders with responsibility of governance. Obama as president naturally does not wish to be treated in the manner in which he once treated President Bush. Conservatives might resent Obama’s prior demagoguery at a critical period in our national security, as much as they are relieved that he seems to have grown up and repudiated it.

Okay, the public perhaps understands all that hypocrisy as the stuff of presidential politics. But I think it will not quite accept the next step of taking full credit in hyperbolic first-person fashion for operations that would have been impossible had his own views prevailed.

— NRO contributor Victor Davis Hanson is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, the editor of Makers of Ancient Strategy: From the Persian Wars to the Fall of Rome, and the author of The Father of Us All: War and History, Ancient and Modern.

[Tonus]

The policy of taking Al Qaeda apart from the top down seems to be having some positive results. (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/19/world/asia/19policy.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all) I'm not sure if an accelerated draw-down is the best idea, especially if we're really having this kind of success right now.

Qaeda Woes Fuel Talk of Speeding Afghan Pullback

WASHINGTON — As the Obama administration nears a crucial decision on how rapidly to withdraw combat forces from Afghanistan, high-ranking officials say that Al Qaeda’s original network in the region has been crippled, providing a rationale for an accelerated reduction of troops.

The officials said the intense campaign of drone strikes and other covert operations in Pakistan — most dramatically the raid that killed Osama bin Laden — had left Al Qaeda paralyzed, with its leaders either dead or pinned down in the frontier area near Afghanistan. Of 30 prominent members of the terrorist organization in the region identified by intelligence agencies as targets, 20 have been killed in the last year and a half, they said, reducing the threat they pose.

Their confidence, these officials said, was buttressed by information found in Bin Laden’s compound in Pakistan. They said the trove revealed disarray within Al Qaeda’s leadership, with a frustrated Bin Laden indicating that he could no longer direct terrorist attacks by lieutenants who feared for their own lives.

The American success in the counterterrorism campaign would seem to bolster arguments for a swift withdrawal from Afghanistan — an issue the administration is currently examining. The officials emphasized that Mr. Obama had not yet made a determination on that question.

Fighting Al Qaeda, they noted, was the main reason Mr. Obama agreed to deploy 30,000 more troops last year, even as he adopted a broader, more troop-intensive and time-consuming strategy of making key towns in Afghanistan safe from the Taliban and helping the Afghans to build up security forces and a better-functioning government.

The focus on progress against Al Qaeda was also a counter to arguments made by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and other military officials in recent days that the initial reduction of troops should be modest, and that American combat pressure should be maintained as long as possible so that the gains from the surge in troops are not sacrificed.

The military has been pressing for a plan under which only a few thousands troops out of the 100,000 currently in Afghanistan would come home immediately, with the bulk of the 30,000 troops sent last year remaining for another year or more.

The officials declined to discuss Mr. Obama’s views on how many troops should be withdrawn, or how quickly. But their analysis of the counterterrorism operations clearly reflected conclusions presented to the president as the deliberations over force levels reach their final stage. The conclusions would seem to give Mr. Obama room to justify a more accelerated withdrawal than the plan sought by the Pentagon.

The White House appears to be moving swiftly to conclude the internal debate, with officials saying that the president may announce a decision as early as next week, avoiding the kind of drawn-out deliberations that preceded Mr. Obama’s decision in late 2009 to increase troop levels in Afghanistan by 30,000.

Mr. Gates, in an interview on Friday, said: “This was a much more abbreviated process. Nobody wanted to go through what we went through in the fall of 2009.”

In the 18 months since then, one official said, Mr. Obama has developed strong views about what has worked in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The infusion of troops into Afghanistan, he said, had broken the momentum of the Taliban, which in 2009 had made alarming inroads toward its goal of toppling the Afghan government.

But the success in singling out terrorists in neighboring Pakistan has been far more striking, with another official saying that the United States was “poised” to defeat Al Qaeda in what was once its most thriving haven. The organization could no longer use that region as a “launching pad for attacks,” he said. “The safe haven is a misnomer now,” he added. “It is anything but safe for Al Qaeda.”

Officials acknowledge that worldwide, Al Qaeda is far from broken. They consider Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula to be the most immediate threat to the United States homeland, hatching plots from its base in Yemen like the attempt to blow up a jetliner over Detroit on Christmas Day in 2009.

The recent success against Al Qaeda also does not guarantee that its militants will not take root again in Afghanistan, particularly as the United States turns security over to a shaky Afghan government. And a fast reduction of troops could allow the Taliban, which is stalled but not destroyed, to regain power it recently lost to the surge.

In Pakistan, the recent gains could be reversed by the deteriorating relationship between the Pakistani and American governments, which threatens to curtail cooperation in counterterrorism operations and increase Pakistani opposition to drone strikes.

Still, for Mr. Obama, who is weighing the heavy costs of the Afghan war as well as an increasingly restive Congress and public, counterterrorism success is a potentially appealing argument for a relatively rapid American withdrawal.

In 2009, intelligence officials identified 30 top Qaeda leaders in Pakistan and along the Afghan-Pakistan border, a senior administration official said. “We took 15 off the battlefield last year,” he said, including Sheik Saeed al-Masri, the group’s third-ranking operative until he was killed in a drone strike in 2010.

In addition, he said, 5 more of the 30 leaders on the 2009 list were killed this year, including Ilyas Kashmiri, a Pakistani veteran of the Soviet-Afghan war who was accused in 2009 of conspiring with two Chicago men to attack a Danish newspaper that had published a cartoon depicting the Prophet Muhammad.

While typically new operatives take the place of those killed, the rapid pace of attacks has dealt an unusually heavy blow to the organization. An American intelligence assessment concluded that the 28 drone strikes the Central Intelligence Agency has carried out in Pakistan since mid-January have killed about 150 militants, according to an official.

And then there was the spectacular raid by the Navy Seal team that killed Bin Laden in the garrison town of Abbottabad, Pakistan on May 2. It produced a cache of information — documents, hard drives and other materials — that officials said contained revealing discussions between Bin Laden and his key commanders. “The sense was clear that morale was hurt,” an official said, describing the findings without offering documentation or specifics about the internal communications. “They worried most about safety.”

The officials interviewed Friday made no attempt to disguise their belief that the counterterrorism campaign, which was favored by Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. in 2009, has outperformed the more troop-intensive counterinsurgency campaign pushed by Mr. Gates, Gen. David H. Petraeus and other top military planners.

“This progress has been enabled by our surge, and the training of A.N.S.F., which will be critical to the durability of gains against the safe haven and against the Taliban,” said Tommy Vietor, a National Security Council spokesman, referring to the Afghan National Security Force. “These gains would not have been possible at this rate and quality without the service of our men and women in uniform.”

Besides going after Qaeda and Taliban operatives, the counterinsurgency campaign includes a broad plan to try to improve governance in Afghanistan, fight corruption, train the Afghan Army, wean farmers off the cultivation of poppies, promote women’s rights and protect local population centers.

When Mr. Obama decided in December 2009 to go with the more ambitious plan backed by the Pentagon, the president said he would allow “18 months to test those concepts,” a senior White House official said.

“What we’ve seen is the pursuit of Al Qaeda has yielded probably even greater successes than we thought,” the official said. As for the assortment of projects under the banner of counterinsurgency, the official said that the “infusion of resources has allowed the Afghan National Army forces to be trained up.”

[Grunthos]

Ah, but there are old campaign promises to try to appear to keep, and another election coming up.

[Tonus]

Osama: Our problem is branding (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110624/ap_on_re_us/us_al_qaida_new_name)

Yeah, that was Charles Manson's problem, too. It can be so inconvenient to be a soulless monster who sucks at PR.

Terror by any other name: Osama eyed name change

WASHINGTON – As Osama bin Laden watched his terrorist organization get picked apart, he lamented in his final writings that al-Qaida was suffering from a marketing problem. His group was killing too many Muslims and that was bad for business. The West was winning the public relations fight. All his old comrades were dead and he barely knew their replacements.

Faced with these challenges, bin Laden, who hated the United States and decried capitalism, considered a most American of business strategies. Like Blackwater, ValuJet and Philip Morris, perhaps what al-Qaida really needed was a fresh start under a new name.

The problem with the name al-Qaida, bin Laden wrote in a letter recovered from his compound in Pakistan, was that it lacked a religious element, something to convince Muslims worldwide that they are in a holy war with America.

Maybe something like Taifat al-Tawhed Wal-Jihad, meaning Monotheism and Jihad Group, would do the trick, he wrote. Or Jama'at I'Adat al-Khilafat al-Rashida, meaning Restoration of the Caliphate Group.

As bin Laden saw it, the problem was that the group's full name, al-Qaida al-Jihad, for The Base of Holy War, had become short-handed as simply al-Qaida. Lopping off the word "jihad," bin Laden wrote, allowed the West to "claim deceptively that they are not at war with Islam." Maybe it was time for al-Qaida to bring back its original name.

The letter, which was undated, was discovered among bin Laden's recent writings. Navy SEALs stormed his compound and killed him before any name change could be made. The letter was described by senior administration, national security and other U.S. officials only on condition of anonymity because the materials are sensitive. The documents portray bin Laden as a terrorist chief executive, struggling to sell holy war for a company in crisis.

At the White House, the documents were taken as positive reinforcement for President Barack Obama's effort to eliminate religiously charged words from the government's language of terrorism. Words like "jihad," which also has a peaceful religious meaning, are out. "Islamic radical" has been nixed in favor of "terrorist" and "mass murderer." Though former members of President George W. Bush's administration have backed that effort, it also has drawn ridicule from critics who said the president was being too politically correct.

"The information that we recovered from bin Laden's compound shows al-Qaida under enormous strain," Obama said Wednesday in his speech to the nation on withdrawing troops from Afghanistan. "Bin Laden expressed concern that al-Qaida had been unable to effectively replace senior terrorists that had been killed and that al-Qaida has failed in its effort to portray America as a nation at war with Islam, thereby draining more widespread support."

Bin Laden wrote his musings about renaming al-Qaida as a letter but, as with many of his writings, the recipient was not identified. Intelligence officials have determined that bin Laden only communicated with his most senior commanders, including his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahri, and his No. 3, Mustafa Abu al-Yazid, according to one U.S. official. Because of the courier system bin Laden used, it's unclear to U.S. intelligence whether the letter ever was sent.

Al-Yazid was killed in a U.S. airstrike last year. Zawahri has replaced bin Laden as head of al-Qaida.

In one letter sent to Zawahri within the past year or so, bin Laden said al-Qaida's image was suffering because of attacks that have killed Muslims, particularly in Iraq, officials said. In other journal entries and letters, they said, bin Laden wrote that he was frustrated that many of his trusted longtime comrades, whom he'd fought alongside in Afghanistan, had been killed or captured.

Using his courier system, bin Laden could still exercise some operational control over al-Qaida. But increasingly the men he was directing were younger and inexperienced. Frequently, the generals who had vouched for these young fighters were dead or in prison. And bin Laden, unable to leave his walled compound and with no phone or Internet access, was annoyed that he did not know so many people in his own organization.

The U.S. has essentially completed the review of documents taken from bin Laden's compound, officials said, though intelligence analysts will continue to mine the data for a long time.