This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Why Didn't We Capture the Terrorist Kingpin and Interrogate Him?
I'm as happy as the next red-blooded American that Bin Laden is dead.
For
more than a decade, the government has said that Bin Laden is the
world's worst terrorist, a terrorist kingpin, the head of the worst
terrorist group in the world.
But if we captured and interrogated him, he could have spilled a lot of beans which would help prevent future terrorist attacks.
Right?
But as the Atlantic reports today:
There's one option the administration appears to have never seriously considered: taking bin Laden alive.
***
The
administration had made clear to the military's clandestine Joint
Special Operations Command that it wanted bin Laden dead, according to a
senior U.S. official with knowledge of the discussions. A
high-ranking military officer briefed on the assault said the SEALs
knew their mission was not to take him alive.
The White House now admits that Bin Laden wasn't armed, so why wasn't he captured? The government now says that the Seals who entered the compound thought he was reaching for a weapon.
That
might be true, although Bin Laden wasn't exactly a healthy spring
chicken. Indeed, Bin Laden was already pretty sickly by late 2001.
(Don't worry: This post won't go down any rabbit holes regarding claims
that Bin Laden died years ago.)
As CNN terrorism analyst Peter Bergen - who met Bin Laden and studied Bin Laden and his operation for many years - told CNN in 2002:
He's aged enormously between '97 and October of last year.
This is a man who was clearly not well. I mean, as you see from these
pictures here, he's really, by December he's looking pretty terrible.
But by December, of course, that tape that was aired then, he's barely
moving the left side of his body. So he's clearly got diabetes. He has
low blood pressure. He's got a wound in his foot. He's apparently got
dialysis ... for kidney problems.
I mean, this is a
man who has a number of health problems, apart from the fact that
anybody running around the Afghan mountains is not going to be in great
shape.
Indeed, the oldest - and second-largest - French newspaper claims that Bin Laden was in the hospital for kidney failure two months before 9/11. As the Guardian notes:
Two months before September 11 Osama bin Laden flew to Dubai for 10 days for treatment at the American hospital, where he was visited by the local CIA agent, according to the French newspaper Le Figaro.
The
disclosures are known to come from French intelligence which is keen
to reveal the ambiguous role of the CIA, and to restrain Washington
from extending the war to Iraq and elsewhere.
Bin Laden is reported to have arrived in Dubai on July 4 from Quetta in Pakistan with his own personal doctor, nurse and four bodyguards, to be treated in the urology department.
***
Bin Laden has often
been reported to be in poor health. Some accounts claim that he is
suffering from Hepatitis C, and can expect to live for only two more
years.
According to Le Figaro, last year he ordered a mobile dialysis machine to be delivered to his base at Kandahar in Afghanistan.
And CBS news reported that Bin Laden was ill on September 10, 2001, being treated in a Pakistan hospital with kidney dialysis:
In addition, it is rumored that Bin Laden had Marfan Syndrome - a
disorder of the connective tissue, which usually shortens the life span
(Abraham Lincoln had Marfan).
As Salon noted in November 2001:
Judging
by photos and the FBI's physical records, Osama bin Laden could be a
candidate for the diagnosis. He is said to be between 6 foot 4 inches
and 6 foot 6, which is apparently unusual for his family. He is thin,
bony and has little muscle; he weighs only 160 pounds. And he uses a
cane -- possibly the result of connective tissue or back problems.
Other information about the leader of al-Qaida suggests he may have a
heart condition. His facial structure also resembles that of people with
Marfan.
"He is Marfanoid," says Dr. Richard
Devereux, a clinician who treats patients with the illness at the Weill
Cornell Medical Center in New York. "He seems to have long fingers and
long arms. His head appears to be elongated and his face narrow ...
It's certainly conceivable that he has the Marfan syndrome and could be
evaluated for it."
Though people have long
speculated about bin Laden having Marfan, federal officials won't
answer questions about his health. "We don't discuss the medical
conditions of our enemy commanders," says Maj. Jay Steuck, a Defense
Department spokesman. And a Central Intelligence Agency spokesman says,
"We don't do unclassified medical summaries."
***
Yossef
Bodansky, staff director of the House Task Force on Terrorism, told
the New York Post: "We are getting a lot of reports and rumors. By all
accounts, bin Laden is not a healthy man and is under a lot of stress."David K. Schenker, a research fellow at the
Washington Institute for Near East Policy, agrees that bin Laden's size
is atypical for his surroundings. "I lived in the Middle East, and I
never ran into anyone that tall," he says.
***
Should
bin Laden have Marfan syndrome, the stress of cave-hopping and trying
to outrun Allied cruise missiles could prove deadly. "People with the
disease are told not to engage in heavy exercise," says Dr. Darwin
Prockop, director of the Center for Gene Therapy at Tulane University.
"If Osama bin Laden has Marfan, he is in danger of sudden rupture of
the aorta and sudden death."
Again, this post will
not go down the rabbit hole to ask whether Bin Laden died prior to
Sunday's raid. I am only focusing on the fact that Bin Laden was
probably not a healthy young bad guy when he was thought to be reaching
for a gun.
Bin Laden’s 12 year old daughter purportedly claims
that Bin Laden was successfully captured alive first and then later
summarily executed by the troops. Hopefully, this isn't true.
But assuming the government's version of events is true, why didn't the seals use knock-out gas and capture him? Even common thugs use knock out gas. For example, the U.S. state department warns:
Do not accept food or drink from strangers. Criminals have been known to drug food or drink offered to passengers. Criminals may also spray sleeping gas in train compartments.
Where possible, lock your compartment. If it cannot be locked
securely, take turns sleeping in shifts with
your traveling companions. If that is not possible, stay awake. If you
must sleep unprotected, tie down your luggage
and secure your valuables to the extent possible.
(Be careful if you take any night trains in Italy).
If
common hoodlams knock out their victims, you know that the U.S.
military has stuff they can easily lob in and knock everyone out. Why
didn't the government knock out Bin Laden and then hall him off to the
interrogation room?
Indeed, the U.S. may have gotten the clue about Osama bin Laden's Abbottabad location in 2008. As the Guardian notes:
US may have got Osama bin Laden's Abbottabad clue in 2008 – WikiLeaks
Courier's interrogation at Guantánamo revealed network of messengers that US traced to track down the al-Qaida leader
The
US may have obtained a clue three years ago that Osama bin Laden was
hiding in Abbottabad, according to information gathered by interrogators
at Guantánamo.***
WikiLeaks released the report last
week, prompting speculation that the US, afraid that its planned raid
might be pre-empted, brought forward its attack.
So the U.S. could have knocked him out in 2008 and interrogated him.
As I've pointed out before, the U.S. had multiple opportunities to get Bin Laden in 2001 and 2007:
According
to the U.S. Senate - Bin Laden was "within the grasp" of the U.S.
military in Afghanistan in December 2001, but that then-secretary of
defense Rumsfeld refused to provide the soldiers necessary to capture him.
This is not news: it was disclosed in 2005 by the CIA field commander for the area in Afghanistan where Bin Laden was holed up.
In addition, French soldiers allegedly say that they easily could have captured or killed Bin Laden in Afghanistan, but that the American commanders stopped them.
***
A retired Colonel and Fox News military analyst said that the U.S. could have killed Bin Laden in 2007, but didn't:
We
know, with a 70 percent level of certainty — which is huge in the
world of intelligence — that in August of 2007, bin Laden was in a
convoy headed south from Tora Bora. We had his butt, on camera, on
satellite. We were listening to his conversations. We had the world’s
best hunters/killers — Seal Team 6 [Note: this is the exact same team
that is credited with killing Bin Laden yesterday] — nearby. We had
the world class Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) coordinating
with the CIA and other agencies. We had unmanned drones overhead with
missiles on their wings; we had the best Air Force on the planet,
begging to drop one on the terrorist. We had him in our sights; we had
done it ....Unbelievably, and in my opinion, criminally, we did not
kill Usama bin Laden.Indeed, a United States Congressman claims that the Bush administration intentionally let Bin Laden escape in order to justify the Iraq war.
Moreover, as I've previously noted, capturing Bin Laden and taking down Al Qaeda was never the real priority:
American historian, investigative journalist and policy analyst Gareth Porter writes in the Asia Times:
***
Feith's book, War and Decision, released last month, provides excerpts of the paper Rumsfeld sent to President George W Bush on September 30, 2001, calling for the administration to focus not on taking down Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda network but on the aim of establishing "new regimes" in a series of states...
***
If we had really wanted to get Bin Laden, we would have gotten him in 2001 (indeed, the Taliban offered to turn him over), or 2007.
And Gareth Porter reported yesterday that the U.S. didn't even consider capturing Bin Laden as part of its Afghanistan war strategy:
The Rumsfeld and the Cheney and Rumsfeld were determined not to allow a focus Even after Bush
absence of any military planning to catch bin Laden was a function of
Bush's national security team, led by Vice-President Dick Cheney and
Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld, which had firmly opposed any
military operation in Afghanistan that would have had any possibility
of catching bin Laden and his lieutenants.
second-ranking official at the Pentagon, Paul Wolfowitz, had dismissed
CIA warnings of an al Qaeda terrorist attack against the United States
in the summer of 2001, and even after 9/11 had continued to question
the CIA's conclusion that bin Laden and al Qaeda were behind the
attacks.
on bin Laden to interfere with their plan for a U.S. invasion of Iraq
to overthrow the Saddam Hussein regime.
decided in favour of an Afghan campaign, CENTCOM commander Tommy
Franks, who was responsible for the war in Afghanistan, was not
directed to have a plan for bin Laden’s capture or to block his escape
to Pakistan.
We tortured a bunch of innocent farmers, children, and grandparents
... supposedly to get information about Bin Laden. But it doesn't
seem like the government was very interested in actually interrogating
Bin Laden himself.
- advertisements -
Ask the reverse: why was no one interested in capturing or even killing g'W'bush? Daddy Bush? Clinton? The phrase 'total waste of time' springs to mind. As for the big BO = let him do it!
I have Bed Linen, you have Bed Linen! The question is - who stole my Duvet!
The Bedouins?
Some people have speculated Abraham Lincoln had Marfan's Syndrome but it has never been proven nor has there ever been convincing evidence to support it. He was, in fact, very physically fit and formidable and Marfan's would have presented itself very early on in youth when Lincoln was kicking everybody's asses in wrestling matches.
Lincoln's height may have contributed to his shortened life by making him a better target at Ford's theater, but that's about it.
The actions of the US raise a number of interesting questions. Let's assume that BenLaden has not been dead for some time as I believe. If it is now acceptable for a sovereign state to execute a plan to send armed men to kill an unarmed, unindited suspect outside of the territory of said state, who can't the president have legally murdered in cold blood? I'm pretty sure everyone is now fair game.
Given that President Obama is suspected of commiting a war crime, by refusing to investigate former President Bush, for the prideful, and self admitted, war crime of ordering the torture, of what the Geneva conventions consider prisoners of war. Would it be acceptable for a sovereign state to send out a hit team, and using military weapons blow up the oval office during a press conference?
I'm pretty sure the Supreme court would say Iran doing so would be illegal. I just can't figure out how they would draw the distinction. Maybe it's OK, cause we are the good guys, and they are the bad guys.
You make a good point about what Obama's limitations are regarding the killing of humans and I'm afraid he might start to like it. Especially after he's already referred to fellow Americans as "enemies that need to be punished"... remarkably, I don't recall he's never referred to OBL as an enemy...
But this whole thing about Geneva Conventions (GC)... they only apply to lawful combatants -- and Al-Qaeda is as unlawful as they come. Holder and the PC crowd are trying to change that, but the fact is GCs don't apply to them yet the ACLU crowd (same defense attorney types that got disbarred and jailed for kindly passing notes to terrorist cells after the first WTC bombing) wants to grant them full rights of citizenship, which is just another atrocity.
There are Human rights, Geneva Convention rights, and Civil Rights. They're all different.
AQ is entitled to Human rights -- and sure enough they get better medical and dental than most Americans, I can assure you. They've put on 20 lbs and promptly were ridded of the lice in their hair after capture. They were malnourished.
GC rights apply to lawful combatants in uniform who also fight following rules of GC, eg., not killing civilians as a tactic. Spies were still subject to being shot under GC just for captured in civilian clothing mingling covertly as a spies.
Civil rights are the rights of priviliege that come with full legal citizenship; eg, warrents for search and seizure, habeous corpus, right to counsel, right to remain silent, etc. AQ has no right to remain silent, no rank and no serial numbers.
But you're right, our current dear leader wants to change that -- he's a fundamentalist anti-warrior against waterboarding and Gitmo dontcha know, but wants to kill whomever he wishes, whenever; and he's evangelical when it comes to being anti-war and criticizing them, but feels to start wars without consulting congress -- seems he wants it both ways all the time and to let the MSM just cover for them.
The Geneva conventions also apply to civilian populations. Many if not the majority of the people detained by the US have not been taken prisoner on battlefields, but have been delivered by third partys for payment. When the Germans lined up, and shot French villagers, as retaliation for killings of Wermacht soldiers, it was considered a war crime, wasn't it?
Remember in Afghanistan, we are the invaders. The government we attacked, as far as I can tell, had no military as we know it. Their uniform de jure was probably normal Afghan dress. Exactly what uniform would you have had them wear to be lawful combatants? I'd be willing to wager, that in our revolutionary war, there were lots of irregulars, who wore the same clothes to battle, that they wore while plowing their fields. You see, Afgahnistan is much as the colonies were, a poorly developed, agrarian nation, largely lawless outside the cities, full of poor ignorant people, who are lucky to have clothes, but who don't like being invaded by foreigners, and will fight back.
But what the heck, lets say you're right. You can kill, and torture whoever you want, as long as they are wearing the wrong clothes. Both the Iraq, and Afghan wars are wars of agression. Remember Nueremburg? We hung a number of Germans for doing what? Waging a war of aggression, thats what.
I don't care what patently false evidence the CIA came up with on WMDs. The Iraqi state did not attack us, any more than Poland attacked der Vaterland. I don't care who was hanging out there, the Afghan state did not attack us, any more than Belgium attacked the thousand year Reich. There was not even an extradition treaty between the US, and Afghanistan. They were no more obliged to turn over OBL, than the US was obliged to return Soviet defectors. On top of that, we refused to even show evidence that OBL broke any laws, when they asked to see it, which is required in extradition proceedings. Could it be their was no evidence, or that the evidence implicated American agencies? Maybe it was just too good an opportunity to start a war. Oops theres that war of agression theme again.
Now go and tell your goverment masters that the mean old ZH reader made fun of your arguments. Before you accuse me of being some unpatriotic leftist, let me say that my family fought against the British in the southern colonies, to make this nation, and that I am a registered Republican. It's just that I know evil when I see it. Oh yeah, I'm sure Washington, Madison, and Jefferson would agree with me. Not so sure about Hamilton.
By the way, the Bill of Rights, or whatever is left of it, applys to everyone, not just citizens. That includes the right of Habeus Corpus, unless the Congress suspends it in time of rebellion or invasion. That is when we are invaded, not when we invade another country.
After applying the bullshit filter to that post,
What remains is the same as with O'Bama.
ZERO
BTW: The Iranians have sent hit squads to many countries to take out their enemies of the state. What has any other state ever done about it?
Obama has gone cowboy and ordered him killed. I think he's really starting to dig it. There can only be one... leader of the Muslim world.
Cheap publicity stunt. They knew where OBL was since August. Obama's polls hit a new low, along with the USD, and distraction was needed.
Capturing him would only make BHO and Eric Holder have to answer embarrassing questions like, "Why don't you have the trial in NYC, like you said, so the juror's families can get their heads cut off?"
BHO, fearless Commander in Chief, didn't bother to show for last years Arlington Wreath ceremony at the tomb of the unknown soldier but now he is 100% for letting the military try to bail him out and for going to ground zero for an unearned victory lap (after bashing Bush for rallying the firemen).
He is alive and being "water-boarded" as we speak....if they wanted him dead, just send in the drones..........as we have done numerous times in pakistan...
That's what they ought to do, and not the medically supervised kind either, but there isn't enough water in the world for OBL.
Nonsense.
Until the US made it public they were engaged inside Pakistan, in Abotabad, in a compound....
THERE WAS NO FREAKIN' REPORTING OF ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
The Paki's haven't said a word about it until Obama made it public.
Obama at Ground Zero tomorrow.
Surely, they planned this event prior to Sunday. Only a fool would believe, the protocol of such a visit can be arranged hastily as the Sunday address or the press conferences.
Question is, what is Obama going to announce to NY and the world tomorrow from Ground Zero?
This script is very badly written, the execution is half baked and when more than half the world's population have doubt, a large portion of the domestic population have doubts then it is fair to conclude the propaganda effort has failed.
Years later we will teach our children that the US empire resorted to blatant lies and manipulation in its last years of existence.
It's over, folks.
Somebody should ask him, now that he got Bin Laden, when he's going to catch the guy that killed Building 7
FTMFW!
One of the earlier comments from officials said something to the effect of 'the seal team practiced in a secret mock up of the compound'.
This was weeks or months in the making, but you gotta love the spin. "We had this chance, we had to rush, no time to think" haha..
The administration said that they had known about his location since last August.
I think you are right. The books will look at this as a gasp along the timeline of our demise.
Obama looks like monkey aping Bush in the mirror.
Careful with the monkey analogy, but yeah, the similarity is scary.
Come on! Those jug ears, those weird purple lips, that eggplant of a head?
OSAMBO IS A MONKEY!
If you're going to try to justify the monkey shit with "WELL HE LOOKS LIKE ONE HUR HUR", why the fuck would you throw "Sambo" in there too?
I think it's safe to say that if OBL were taken alive it would be a non-stop circus:
is he being treated fairly, is he being detained in the appropriate facility, how many lawyers should he have, which international authorities should be allowed to put in their two cents, where should the trial be, what kind of trial should it be, what should be allowed as evidence, should he be interrogated within two weeks of a Muslim holy day, was he read his Miranda rights, who should be allowed to see him, if this than how come that...
Admit it GW, this would have been the Super Bowl of judgemental bellyaching and you're a little disappointed the game got cancelled.
For better or worse - if taking enemy combatants/terrorists/pirates prisoner becomes more of a hassle to the government on the home front than it's worth even they will eventually arrive at the decision to take no prisoners.
Why ever have trials? Why not execute you when the cop thinks you've been speeding? It could save some money and everyone knows we need money. Plus the sheep get a lot more docile when they know what's next.
Fun read, totally speculative, but supporting GW's main implication:
http://pajamasmedia.com/michaelledeen/2011/05/04/what-if-the-killing-of-bin-laden-is-the-beginning-of-the-great-american-retreat/
Why would they need to question him. They did listen to his briefings didn't they? I am not sure why (or when) this "asset" was terminated, but it is likely they knew everything he knew.
George. When you want someone dead, it is unwise to risk escape or other problems. Also, IF he were a captive, the followers would be more motivated than they are motivated now.
I agree with your concept, and wouldn’t it be nice to chat with him. The risk was too great. 1. Kill 2. Get proof and the body if possible. 3. Deliver the body to those who can prove his identity.
It is ugly. It is not the USA that we may want. It is that it is. WAR
At least we placated his followers by dumping the evidence into the ocean
When this kind of thing goes down, I can't help but hum to myself 'Amercia, F*ck Yeah!".
Team America totally nailed it.
I don't recall any of the talking heads referring to this as an assassination, as per what the Isralis did the other year in Dubai.
Much of the world that isn't american, finds Obama's reference to 'Justice being served' a curious one. We have courts that serve justice, not military personnel....
I wasn't aware the shitbag held a political office.
Here's the education you apparently missed in school...
An assassination is "to murder (a usually prominent person) by a sudden and/or secret attack, often for political reasons."[1][2] An additional definition is "the act of deliberately killing someone especially a public figure, usually for hire or for political reasons."
The US has its reasons for murdering the guy, but to call it justice is an affront to the meaning of justice. And to see the way the media handled the issue, very different from the israeli incursion in Dubai, where that nation also had it's reasons for murder.
I'm not passing judgement on the character of these clowns, what the world needs to consider is the creeping reach of governments and elected officials, choosing to operate outside the rule of law.
That is a dangerous slippery slope to the loss of democracy...
This story is the political equivalent of when they started giving huge home loans to illegal aliens who had just emerged dehydrated from the Sonoran desert.
The United States pyramid scheme has run its course.
Only fitting that they titled this Operation "Geronimo."
The surrender of Geronimo signalled the closing of the western frontier.
We're all Indians now, and the US is one big reservation.
here is the theory. if you are the sovereign you can
have the cake and eat it too. and you can call the cake
"yours". but you can't make everything magically delicious.
.
meaning obama or a president can claim credit for events
that may or may not have taken place and also not
be legally responsible for any of the consequences.
he can claim thing have happened even if they haven't.
he only has to face the counters of votes every four years
or impeachment procedures. all of this can be neutralized
with money if people will shirk their duty for money.
that is probably a significant number of influential people
given the characteristics necessary to become influential
today.
.
so how many wives did osama have? and how many daughters?
is he the natural father or step father?
.
so obama says re photo release "that is not who we are."
right.
but we are the people who will go into other countries and murder
people without declarations of war or trials or anything
resembling a trial. that is who we are. no photos thank you.
you can't interrogate the dead. you can make videos of them
saying whatever you want though, they never object.
having his cake.
should things get serious and investigations ensue he will
eat the cake that says osama died in 2002, the charges are
apparently erroneous. this is the kind of shit they do, the
way they think. how else do you reconcile a "world leader"
illegally ordering the murder of a person in broad daylight
in violation of international law? how? he is admitting to
being an international terrorist. but ....
re the photos " that is not who we are ". he must be on
some kind of mind numbing drugs to say these things with
a straight face. the presidential cocktail prescription,
better than rush's stuff i guess.
and the media can't see this? no question about it.
speech and human characteristics are wasted on this population /
generation. i fear we deserve to suffer the fate of the terminally
stupid.
Good 'ol Dan Rather.........there's a fucking moron I sure don't miss
my favorite lie so far was OBL using a woman as a shield......they still havent beat that one yet
- the angle of the daughter's account is supreme.
- the wife's positive id, but no confirmation who the wife is.
- the fact that Paki's equivalent to West Point is 45 mins away and no Paki military picked up the US metal in the sky over Abotabad.
- sea burial within a few hours after the alleged killing because the great USA "considered" that nobody else wanted the body..
propaganda clusterfuck
The daughter's testimony kills the theory that if we could we would have captured him. It also killsthe theory he was previously dead and deep frozen...
We have a lot of delusional people on this thread. Apart from those who think that the USA needs to kill half the world to feel safe and treat the remaining half like docile, subservient, scared cattle. Fortunately this category is not prevalent on ZH.
"Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy." -- Henry Kissinger
No need to interegate Osama as we pilfered computers, hard drives, and phone numbers off his dead body, etc.
GW
read the book from one of your sources, http://www.amazon.com/bin-Laden-Man-Declared-America/dp/0761535810/ref=n...
Some nice bomb shells on the Clinton Administration in that book. One was the assertion that Clinton knew a plot was on to assasinate Hosni Mubarak as he attended a conference in Ethiopia but failed to notify the Eygptian leader. News story of the attempt is below.
http://articles.latimes.com/1995-06-27/news/mn-17703_1_president-mubarak
Gives new meaning to all the unrest in Eygpt.
Sadat before that, by proven Islamic fanatics...but don't expect GW to try and connect any dots in any direction except for one direction...his history book only has one chapter.
Given the level of training SEALs undergo, I'll lay money on the fact that either someone took a shot at the troops or was clearly about to - always keeping in mind, of course, that our soldiers are trained to kill, not to capture. Especially under the stress of a actual or imminent combat situation, anyone who isn't absolutely submissive stands the risk of being shot.
What I'm really getting out of all this is a superbly executed special forces mission compromised by the most egregiously stupid mistakes at the political level.
I'd like to think that the good guys killed the big bad boogeyman too
Osama Bin Laden was not captured because he was already dead long ago. Furthermore, as a CIA asset, Osama was working for Bush previously, and if he was recently alive (doubtful) he has been working for Obama. Somehow, I don't think the predators-that-be are going to let someone in his position (collaborators with the biggest predators and terrorists, the government of the USSA) be "interrogated" and possibly reveal information that the predators-that-be do not want revealed.
How can anyone believe or even accept as plausible anything the government of the USSA says today? Everything out of their mouths and soundbites is crafted to achieve their agenda, not provide information.
Furthermore, why is nobody seeing why the Osama story happened exactly when it did? It is so utterly obvious to anyone with an alert, functioning brain. What is that?
Obama just released his supposed "long form certificate of live birth". Somebody in the CIA or whitehouse screwed up and released the wrong PDF file... the original PDF file that had not yet been "flattened" to eliminate evidence that the document was fraudulantly assembled by computer software. As a result, tens of thousands of people worldwide quickly learned that the document was definitely without any possibility of error a FAKE and a FRAUD. Which means, Obama is an illegal alien and not president.
Obviously they don't want this debate, they don't want any investigation, they don't want Obama arrested, summarily impeached, the tried for treason.
So what do they do? They manufacture the most attention grabbing story they could imagine... the "Obama killed Osama" story. Then for good measure they had their fellow predators-that-be at JPM and elsewhere crash the silver market, which they know is important to many of the same folks who distrust government (liberty advocates).
What's next? Who knows. But be assured, they will keep up the "big stories" as long as necessary until everyone forgets the "old news" story that is, in fact, the biggest story of the decade if not century... the overt takeover the USSA by the predators-that-be and predator-class.
Wake up humans! Wake up!
You are telling people to “wake up” for the simple reason that they disagree with you. You have an opinion that MSM and USG sources cannot be trusted, but you seem to trust completely what you read on the internet if it fits your preconceived notions of how the world operates. You have decided, with nothing backing it up except words on a screen, that ObL “worked for Bush previously” and then Obama. Thus, someone can pull something completely out of his or her ass, post it on the internet, and because it stands in opposition to what the USG or MSM says, it “must” be correct and that anyone who doesn’t buy it is co-opted, asleep or a sheeple.
Bullshit. You have an opinion, absolutely nothing more.
chindit13...another voice of sanity in a maelstrom of bullshit.
I'm on a farewell tour here. The paranoid idiocy is embarrassing, and even as an anonymous voice I really don't want to have association with a site that has attracted a few too many loons. I'm a little puzzled by Tyler (s). Their financial reporting is first rate, the best on the web. In the realm of geopolitics---and they can correct me if I am wrong---they pander to the moonbats, who apparently are a more attractive demographic than I ever would have thought. That is sad, though, because it feeds the critics of ZH who can then disparage all of the financial reporting by pointing out the delusional fantasies of the wingnuts.
I have to agree with your statement about geopolitics: 3 caveats, however. Geopolitical and geostrategic thinking have never been anyone in Americas strong suit. 2) Paranoia is not confined to the blogosphere. Paranoid government loons have rammed home silly war after silly war based on paranoid and simplistic thinking regarding geostrategy (such as the ridiculous "domino theory" that led us into Vietnam and the give freedom-at-gunpoint thinking that dominated the Bush regime and its wars). Indeed, I suspect some diagnosis of paranoia is a prerequisite for working at the CIA. 3) When the government has lost all credibility, it gives license to any sort of speculation about its designs, ends, or purposes. At the very least, your post should encourage ZH to improve its geopolitical/geostrategic reporting and bring it up to the very high standards of its financial reporting.
I understand completely, I've thought of it myself. It is getting a lot like standing in the grocery store check out line reading the gossip rags...LOL.
As we witness the end of debt backed money (as I believe we are) and its handmaiden the bankrupt statist Keynesian theory system you would think not everything in the news, is newsworthy to ZH.
Maybe they (the Tyler's) are making a larger point about the pearls & perils of democracy and/or free speech...I don't know.
But it is his/their right to do so...and yes, it attracts some real idiots...maybe it is about hit counts, ego among the blogosphere participants, I don't know. I do know there are some readers with vast life experience & knowledge (such as yourself) who comment and offer their insights to the topics posted, so it retains some value to me.
I do wish you would reconsider though, you would be sorely missed, just like the other elders who have gone before you, leaving the kids to play in the sandbox, unattended, as they break off little pieces of larger toys and choke on them ;-)
If you have made your decision final, God speed to you sir. I have enjoyed your company while you were here...if you find a more suitable place drop me a line & let me know.
With my warmest personal regards,
nmewn
BS. I'm bitching because I have not seen anyone else connect these obvious dots. Of course, I'm sure somebody else has made this connection, but obviously not many, because I'm not seeing it. I trust no one.
Is my message inference from evidence? Sure. I do not work in the whitehouse, so I did not listen to them planning these manufactured events. However, long and short term history, and the behavior of the predators in power now, tells us clearly this is how they work.
You say what I say is bullshit. That is bullshit, because you don't know I'm wrong. Do you? I thought not. If you can't connect dots and draw reasonable inferences, don't tell others not to. Not connecting dots and not acting upon common sense is why people walked into gas chambers in nazi germany... and endless other examples of massive human stupidity.
Oh, and no, I am not saying people should wake up because they don't agree with me. That's completely insane! People should wake up all day, every day, about everything they see, and every issue they think about, including things I know nothing about and don't care about. Also, I honestly and eagerly welcome any and every correction of any mistake I make, because I want to understand what is, not hold an idea just because it may tickle my fancy for some reason.