Corrente

If you have "no place to go," come here!

Take-OUT not Take-down of OBL -- DEAD MEN TELL NO TALES!

Submitted by libbyliberal on Wed, 05/04/2011 - 3:50pm
Departments: 
Department of Now It All Makes Sense
Thread: 
Disinformation
Tags: 
CIA
Osama Bin Laden
Pepe Escobar

(553 Obama-dumping days until 2012 election-Hugh's Obama's Scandals List)

Pepe Escobar of Asia Times suggests the motivation for the alleged take-OUT not take-down of Osama Bin Ladin:

The hero, fully equipped, pumped up, is face to face with the real Osama bin Laden, unarmed, just out of bed, trapped in a drab room. There's no possible escape; the whole compound is "secured". This is it - the moment America has been dreaming about since September 11, 2001.

[snip]

Now the hero is face to face with the man who caused the "war on terror" itself to exist. And what does he do? Not a shot in the arm, leg or knee. Not even a casually tossed stun grenade. No extraordinary rendition - what is this good for anyway if it does not apply to public enemy number one?

The hero double-taps the fugitive - codename "Geronimo" (a native who defied the Empire; talk about defiling native-Americans once again). This is the way the biggest, costliest manhunt ever ends; not with a prolonged bang, but with two golden bullets. Good guy snuffs bad guy. Dirty Harry snuffs the punk.

So no one in the world will ever know. How "Geronimo" became a Central Intelligence Agency asset - and how the "friendship" developed during the 1980s. How he escaped from Tora Bora - or how the Pentagon let him escape. How he lived in Pakistan all these years, undisturbed. Why did he "hate us".

And most of all how he "masterminded" 9/11. Which branch - or branches, or individuals - of the US intelligence network knew about it in advance, and let it happen. How a bunch of Arabs with box-cutters and crappy flying skills turned jets into missiles and destroyed the Twin Towers (plus building 7) and a chunk of the mighty Pentagon.

Who in the world would dare not to be glued for months to the most stirring trial of all time?

There are reasons to believe the entities - the system - that arranged the hit would not be very pleased. So the verdict is guilty as (not) charged - and termination by a bullet in the head. It's never been so easy to create a wasteland and call it "justice".

As for the rest of us, we'll spend the rest of our lives in the dark.

Good thing for the amoralists running America the media easily sells an "end justifies the most titillating means" scenario, hang logic, decency or law.

0
No votes yet

Comments

twig's picture
Submitted by twig on

it's nothing but blood for blood vengeance. So now the US represents vigilante justice and crowds who rejoice at the news of a kill shot. I'm starting to think this country is beyond redemption.

DCblogger's picture
Submitted by DCblogger on

at first I was numb, didn't care. after all, this won't end the wars or get us our constitution back, but I am glad he is dead.

of all the people who have died as a result of his crimes it was insane to leave him alive. in fact, in the eyes of the people of Afghanistan, it must have looked pretty odd that we kept killing them but not bin Laden.

and it is a sign to Pakistan and everyone else that they cannot harbour nortorious criminals without bringing trouble down on their head.

A trial was not practical, and no country would take the body, so it was dumped, just as bin Laden had done to so many others.

It does not alter the fact that Obama is a torturing, war mongering, disaster capitalism fool, but I am glad he got bin Laden.

Submitted by jawbone on

anywhere in the world a plane can fly.

And shirines can spring up for leaders whose bodies are not available for burial.

But, it sounds sort of plausible.

I guess I really would have preferred a trial -- could have been a special UN court, if we were unable to try him.

Interesting that the daughter is quoted as saying her father was shot, but that also come from Pakistani sources. Right?

Submitted by libbyliberal on

... have the Geneva Conventions been permanently trashed since initial War on Terror "game on"?

What are the "rules of engagement" left?

I stopped watching The Closer because endearing and feisty Brenda twisted procedure to make sure justice would be done when the law couldn't get there and she presumed, even when guaranteeing unofficial death sentences to the guilty parties. Began to creep me out such hubris and taking the law into her own hands by using her law-empowered position. Clint Eastwood and Charles Bronson type vigilantism, what a slippery slippery slippery slope that is.

lizpolaris's picture
Submitted by lizpolaris on

It's very annoying that our media and politicians fail to note the difference. There is relief in the finality of this action. But justice would require a full accounting of the facts in a court of law. It seems our empire now considers that a sissifying, nit-picking, easily omitted requirement for 'justice.'

Submitted by jawbone on

live capture.

Osama was killed by his own guard: sources
Submitted 1 day 10 hrs ago

World’s most wanted al-Qaeda Chief Osama bin Laden was not killed by the US special forces during a predawn raid at his compound in Abbottabad on late Sunday night, home to Pakistan Army’s military academy and less than two hours drive form Islamabad, instead his body guard killed him to save him from arrested alive, a Pakistani television quoted sources as saying on Tuesday. It said that the officials, who reached the compound after the operation, said they had not found any signs of resistance at any place in the compound. The official said signs indicate that Osama was shot in the head from a close range.

And the stories, they go round and round, and the narrative, it goes up and down.

From The Nation, via commenter bokonon, #s 38-39, at Moon of AL.

Or, who knows for sure?

Submitted by jawbone on

killings.

Question from mother of 3 girls, oldest 12, who asked their mother why OBL had not been taken to jail "where all the bad people go."

Psychiatrist(?) said it was tricky because we're taught that's how the justice system works in the country, but parents can tell children that:

"While this guy was alive, people were frightened of what he could do next no matter where he was, so the people who are in charge of the safety of this nation made a decision that he couldn't be alive." (Rush transcription)

Teach your children well..... And they will learn this lesson.

Via commenter Morocco Bama, #43, also at Moon of AL.

madamab's picture
Submitted by madamab on

Teaching our children that all our principles can be trumped by fear. George Orwell would recognize that sentiment all too well.

Submitted by jawbone on

LINK -- and I did the very brief "rush transcript." I searched but found nothing for "transcripts" at the Today Show site.

The two women were a psychiatrist and a child development specialist. I have no idea which is which.

It's a brief segment (3:44), but has annoying ad (30 seconds).

I do like the "he couldn't be alive" phrasing....

Submitted by libbyliberal on

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article28029.htm

When such a foundational story as the demise of bin Laden cannot last 48 hours without acknowledged “discrepancies” that require fundamental alternations to the story, there are grounds for suspicion in addition to the suspicions arising from the absence of a dead body, from the absence of any evidence that bin Laden was killed in the raid or that a raid even took place. The entire episode could just be another event like the August 4, 1964, Gulf of Tonkin event that never happened but succeeded in launching open warfare against North Vietnam at a huge cost to Americans and Vietnamese and enormous profits to the military/security complex.

There is no doubt that the US is sufficiently incompetent to have needlessly killed bin Laden instead of capturing him. But who can believe that the US would quickly dispose of the evidence that bin Laden had been terminated? The government’s story is not believable that the government dumped the proof of its success into the ocean, but has some photos that might be released, someday.

As one reader put it in an email to me: “What is really alarming is the increasingly arrogant sloppiness of these lies, as though the government has become so profoundly confident of their ability to deceive people that they make virtually no effort to even appear credible.”

Governments have known from the beginning of time that they can always deceive citizens and subjects by playing the patriot card. “Remember the Maine,” the “Gulf of Tonkin,” “weapons of mass destruction,” “the Reichstag fire”--the staged events and bogus evidence are endless. If Americans knew any history, they would not be so gullible.

The real question before us is: What agenda or agendas is the “death of bin Laden” designed to further?

There are many answers to this question. Many have noticed that Obama was facing re-election with poor approval ratings. Is anyone surprised that the New York Times/CBS Poll finds a strong rise in Obama’s poll numbers after the bin Laden raid? As the New York Times reported, “the glow of national pride” rose “above partisan politics, as support for the president rose significantly among both Republicans and independents. In all, 57 percent said they now approved of the president’s job performance, up from 46 percent.”

In Washington-think, a 24% rise in approval rating justifies a staged event.

Another possibility is that Obama realized that the the budget deficit and the dollar’s rescue from collapse require the end of the expensive Afghan war and occupation and spillover war into Pakistan. As the purpose of the war was to get bin Laden, success in this objective allows the US to withdraw without loss of face, thus making it possible to reduce the US budget deficit by several hundred billion dollars annually--an easy way to have a major spending cut.

If this is the agenda, then more power to it. However, if this was Obama’s agenda, the military/security complex has quickly moved against it. CIA director Leon Panetta opened the door to false flag attacks to keep the war going by declaring that al Qaeda would avenge bin Laden’s killing. Secretary of State Clinton declared that success in killing bin Laden justified more war and more success. Homeland Security declared that the killing of bin Laden would motivate “homegrown violent extremists” into making terrorist attacks. “Homegrown violent extremists” is an undefined term, but this newly created bogyman seems to include environmentalists and war protesters. Like “suspect,” the term will include anyone the government wants to pick up.

Various parts of the government quickly seized on the success in killing bin Laden to defend and advance their own agendas, such as torture. Americans were told that bin Laden was found as a result of information gleaned from torturing detainees held in Eastern European CIA secret prisons years ago.

This listing of possible agendas and add-on agendas is far from complete, but for those capable of skepticism and independent thought, it can serve as a starting point. The agendas behind the theater will reveal themselves as time goes on. All you have to do is to pay attention and to realize that most of what you hear from the mainstream media is designed to advance the agendas.

Submitted by libbyliberal on

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article28027.htm

Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich:

Americans are at their most vulnerable
They are vulnerable because they are gullible
They are gullible because they are ignorant
They are ignorant because they are deliberately misinformed.

[snip]

More importantly, we must revisit the historical aspects of "democracy" and what it means to America.

President Theodore Roosevelt claimed: "Democracy has justified itself by keeping for the white race the best portion's of the earth's surface." The need to justify 'democracy' further, led to capture of more of earth's surface, which no doubt explains the remarks by General Arthur MacArthur, (father of Douglas) when he said: "America's wonderful thrust into Asia was the destiny of the magnificent Aryan people." After the brutal takeover of the Philippines, Senator Beveridge claimed: " [J]ust beyond the Philippines are China's illimitable markets. God has not been preparing the English-speaking and Teutonic peoples for a thousand years for nothing but vain and idle self-admiration. No, he has made us the master organizers of the world...that we may administer government among savages and senile peoples...the Philippines are ours forever...and just beyond the Philippines lie China's illimitable markets...We will not renounce our part in the mission of our race, trustee under God, of the civilization of the world...China is our natural customer. The Philippines give us a base at the door of the East.. it has been charged that our conduct of the war has been cruel. Senators, it has been the reverse. Senators, remember that we are not dealing with Americans or Europeans. We are dealing with Orientals." (source: http://www.globalpolicy.org/component/co...).

No doubt the renewed thrust of the empire into the Middle East to justify democracy, assassinate, and plunder is not new; but the method is novel - democracy's cyber warriors.

Submitted by jawbone on

Answer of the Day:From Brian J. Foley in "Trial by Hit Squad"

Instead of killing Bin Laden, the U.S. should have captured and interrogated him. Think how much information we could have gained! If alleged low-level members of Al Qaeda are thought to have information important enough for our government to lock them up at Guantanamo for almost 10 years, then wouldn't it have been smart to ask Bin Laden a few questions instead of shooting him? He's been called the "mastermind" of 9/11 and all things Al Qaeda. (My emphasis)

Ya think?

Via antiwar.com

Turlock