Bin Laden 'firefight': Only one man was armed

[spookyturtle 9,466]

please learn your facts.

http://articles.cnn.com/2001-09-16/us/inv.binladen.denial_1_bin-laden-taliban-supreme-leader-mullah-mohammed-omar?_s=PM:US

Like these?

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/binladen_10-29-04.html

http://abcnews.go.com/International/video/osama-bin-laden-mastermind-911-attacks-terrorist-leader-takes-credit-americas-most-tragic-days-international-13505793

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,137095,00.html

[slim 1,533]

No Trial. Just Execution.

I hope the American Left shuts the hell up from now on the next time someone gets the death penalty.

Hell, who needs a trial. Cops should be able to march right in and kill someone in their own home if they are suspected of killing someone. Shoot their wives and children too while they are at it.

God I love hypocrites.

"No, it's OK because we don't like those people."

bin Laden didn't deserve a trial and didn't get one. Go directly to Hell, do not pass Go, do not collect $200. Justice is served.

"No, it's OK because we don't like those people."

I have yet to hear one VJer mention the legality of of carrying out such operations in a country we are not at war with and apparently had no clearance to be in. On shooting unarmed personnel "at will".

On the contrary.... they suddenly sound like the "rule of law" is a bit more flexible than they let on earlier.

"No, it's OK because we don't like those people."

[Vi-Jay 218]

Huffingtonpost.com

"If we had the opportunity to take him alive, we would have done that," Brennan said during an uncharacteristically candid exchange with reporters at a White House briefing.

Intelligence officials and Obama “extensively” discussed the prospect of capturing bin Laden alive during the U.S. military raid on his compound Sunday, Brennan said, but were “certainly were planning for the possibility … that he would likely resist arrest.” In the end, the al Qaeda leader fought back and was “therefore killed in a firefight,” Brennan said.

Brennan painted a dark scene of bin Laden's final moments. He said the al Qaeda leader used one of his wives as a human shield while he was being shot at.

[uPDATE: Administration officials retreated late Monday from Brennan's claim that one of bin Laden's wives had served as a human shield or that bin Laden himself had been firing back at U.S. forces.]

Brennan press conference;

Q Was it -- was there a visual, or was it just radio reports or phone reports you were getting?

MR. BRENNAN: We were able to monitor the situation in real time and were able to have regular updates and to ensure that we had real-time visibility into the progress of the operation. I'm not going to go into details about what type of visuals we had or what type of feeds that were there, but it was -- it gave us the ability to actually track it on an ongoing basis.

MR. BRENNAN: He was engaged in a firefight with those that entered the area of the house he was in.

Q Could you hear shots fired?

MR. BRENNAN: We were able to monitor the situation in real-time. (Laughter.)

________________________________________________________________________________________

It goes on and on. The story continues to change and change.

Why does this man still have a job?

In my line of work, if my employee, made this many (blatant) misleading mistakes, it's considered Fraud

That employee would be terminated the next day and a formal investigation of myself and the employee, would ensue.

Brennan still has a job.

Edited May 5, 2011 by Vi-Jay

[slim 1,533]

So maybe we are getting closer to war crimes and/or, at minimum, some charges?

[HeatDeath 430]

Like these?

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/binladen_10-29-04.html

http://abcnews.go.com/International/video/osama-bin-laden-mastermind-911-attacks-terrorist-leader-takes-credit-americas-most-tragic-days-international-13505793

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,137095,00.html

Thank you.

There are many controversies about the 9-11 attacks. That Bin Laden publicly took credit for the attacks, repeatedly, starting in 2004, isn't one of them.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-10/30/content_387058.htm

http://english.aljazeera.net/archive/2004/11/200849163336457223.html

The link you posted doesn't work, and even if it did, that denial dates from 2001. An admission of guilt in 2004 massively trumps a denial in 2001.

Unless, of course, in addition to Fox News [of which I could sort of understand, but definitely not the others, particularly not the foreign sources!] you want to write off PBS, ABC News, Al Jazeera English, AND China News Daily as right-wing Republican Bushist CIA propaganda machines, in which case I can only ask - what color is the sky on your planet?

Even the most hard-core truthers will admit this. Assuming Bin Laden wasn't already dead in 2002 [in which case Al-Queda's and/or the CIA's motives for everything since - including the 2004 and subsequent videos and this most recent raid - become much more complex and difficult to analyse], he is reported by multiple sources, including Al Jazeera, to have taken credit for the attacks in 2004, and [most importantly] NOT to have reversed this position since then.

An action for which he was justifiably summarily executed.

Thus, my point stands.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Like these?

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/binladen_10-29-04.html

http://abcnews.go.com/International/video/osama-bin-laden-mastermind-911-attacks-terrorist-leader-takes-credit-americas-most-tragic-days-international-13505793

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,137095,00.html

As I've said. 3 years later.

People like him. Groups like that, do not deny their involvement in such activities as that. They are proud, they gloat, etc.

The video doesn't even really look identical to him anyway if you want to get down to it.

If Bin Laden was responsible, he would have stood loud and proud from day 1. Instead he was just the boogeyman blamed by the US Media and member of our Government before ANY facts were on the table. It took them less than 2 hours to start mentioning Osama Bin Laden on 9/11.

[Little_My 464]

I find this whole left-right conversation utterly frustrating and entirely pointless. This could not have been done 100% right, in a way that would have fully satisfied both sides and all the people involved, and it has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not the sitting president is a democrat or a republican.

First of all, there are plenty of Obama-supporters who are now questioning the circumstances under which Bin Laden was killed - was it in accordance with rules of engagement, did they breach international law, was the operation a violation of Pakistan's sovereignty, could he have been captured alive. It is not as if the entire liberal voting base of this country just blindly accepts all actions from Obama, quite the contrary.

Second of all, I think people are assuming that the president, whoever it happened to be, has a bit more control over the actual situation itself than he in reality does. He is sitting in a command center in Washington D.C. behind monitors while a group og highly trained, highly vigilant SEALs barge into a compound about to capture or kill the most wanted man on the face of the earth, after 10 years of relentless searching that has cost thousands of American lives on US soil and abroad. They barge in, run into people in the house, know with pretty much 100% certainty that there are guns, possibly explosives on that compound - and they react, based on their training, based on their experience, based on adrenaline, aggression, emotion. They may be SEALs, but they are also human beings. They then continue up the stairs, looking for one face - and when they see that face, and if at that point the president, from his command center in D.C, shouts in their ear pieces "do not shoot, get him alive!" - and at the same time he, for example, reaches towards something, anything (to scratch his #### or for a gun, doesn't really matter) - they react. I seriously do not think that Obama gave direct orders to kill him - if my memory serves me right, it was not the current president who publicly stated that Bin Laden will be brought to justice "dead or alive".

Every conversation in this country becomes about the right and the left. It is not about what is ultimately the best end result or option, it is about how to make the other's seem incompetent, which is seriously holding back the progress of this country. I do not see how this operation could have been carried out in a way that would have satisfied everyone. Had he not been killed, there would be an outcry in the US about spending tax dollars on keeping him alive here, debate over where the trial should be held, fear over attempts to free him from the part of his supporters. If Obama has credible intelligence about his location, and failed to act on it now, and that had leaked, he would have been crucified. If he had told the SEALs that they must keep Bin Laden alive unless he directly opens fire at them, and he would have managed to escape - or, an American life would have been lost in the process - Obama would have been crucified. The only way this could have gone down in a way that would not have immediately started an outcry over the details of the situation is if he was waiting outside the compound waiving a white flag, while the US took it's time to get permission from Pakistan, and then US and Pakistani soldiers walked hand in hand to the compound to nicely pick him up while news cameras were rolling and everything was shown on live TV. And, as I said, even then there would be debate over what to do with him next.

And Paul - state led execution in a controlled prison facility when nobody's life is in immediate danger is an entirely different situation and issue than killing Bin Laden during a military operation. Don't get me wrong - as a bleeding heart liberal and a human rights professional I am very concerned and disturbed by some of the details of the killing of Osama - but I wholeheartedly disagree with your comparison to execution. The two are nothing alike. Trust me, there are many of us liberal hypocrits who are not rejoicing and celebrating because a man might have been killed under circumstances in which there was another option - but who the hell knows if there was or if there wasn't. It is all useless speculation at this point. I do not care under whose watch it happened - I would feel exactly the same had it been a Republican president. And, had it been a republican president, I would be saying the exact same thing - he had to make a decision, in a split second, and he did. The rest was in the hands of the SEALS.

The only remotely positive thing I see in this debate is that it is taking the attention away from birth certificate and abortion fights - for now, at least.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Thank you.

There are many controversies about the 9-11 attacks. That Bin Laden publicly took credit for the attacks, repeatedly, starting in 2004, isn't one of them.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-10/30/content_387058.htm

http://english.aljazeera.net/archive/2004/11/200849163336457223.html

The link you posted doesn't work, and even if it did, that denial dates from 2001. An admission of guilt in 2004 massively trumps a denial in 2001.

Unless, of course, in addition to Fox News [of which I could sort of understand, but definitely not the others, particularly not the foreign sources!] you want to write off PBS, ABC News, Al Jazeera English, AND China News Daily as right-wing Republican Bushist CIA propaganda machines, in which case I can only ask - what color is the sky on your planet?

Even the most hard-core truthers will admit this. Assuming Bin Laden wasn't already dead in 2002 [in which case Al-Queda's and/or the CIA's motives for everything since - including the 2004 and subsequent videos and this most recent raid - become much more complex and difficult to analyse], he is reported by multiple sources, including Al Jazeera, to have taken credit for the attacks in 2004, and [most importantly] NOT to have reversed this position since then.

An action for which he was justifiably summarily executed.

Thus, my point stands.

As I've stated, you don't understand the mentality of people like this. You don't deny something like this for 3 years. Especially when you know very well what you've just gotten away with.

Stop and think for a minute. They have been saying that Osama was living in that mansion in Pakistan for 5-6 years now. There is NO WAY IN HELL we did not know he was there. If we didn't, our intelligence sucks and we should worry for our safety.

Bid Laden is nothing more than a US Propaganda boogeyman. Always has been, always will be. He has the look, he has the language, he has everything that we can use in a propaganda machine to get the masses to accept anything this government will throw at them.

[^_^ 5,021]

The only remotely positive thing I see in this debate is that it is taking the attention away from birth certificate and abortion fights - for now, at least.

Not even for now. The GOP is using the UBL conversation as cover to pass this when no one is looking.

And remember that GOPers always say (when it comes to big oil) that the money one gets back due to tax breaks or deductions is actually your own money, not the governments. Apparently that logic does not hold when it comes to abortion. Read on.

House passes restrictive anti-abortion package

By Kathleen Hennessey, Tribune Washington Bureau

May 4, 2011, 2:47 p.m.

WASHINGTON — The House of Representatives on Wednesday approved a sweeping anti-abortion package to further distance federal funds from the procedure by solidifying existing measures and imposing new ones.

...

Under the measure ... individuals could not deduct the cost of an abortion when itemizing health expenses on their taxes, nor could they use tax-exempt savings account to pay for an abortion.

...

Democrats and abortion rights advocates argue ... the tax deduction provision could force victims of rape or incest to have to show proof of the crime to an IRS agent.

"We should not use the tax code to force women to relive their ordeal to a IRS agent," said Rep. Jackie Speier, a California Democrat who recently revealed in an emotional floor speech that she once had an abortion.

Edited May 5, 2011 by \

[Peikko 1,575]

As I've stated, you don't understand the mentality of people like this. You don't deny something like this for 3 years. Especially when you know very well what you've just gotten away with.

Stop and think for a minute. They have been saying that Osama was living in that mansion in Pakistan for 5-6 years now. There is NO WAY IN HELL we did not know he was there. If we didn't, our intelligence sucks and we should worry for our safety.

Bid Laden is nothing more than a US Propaganda boogeyman. Always has been, always will be. He has the look, he has the language, he has everything that we can use in a propaganda machine to get the masses to accept anything this government will throw at them.

Of course, why not? The vast government conspiracy theory. Everyone in govmint has known that Bin Laden's whereabouts were known for years and years and have just been waiting for the perfect time to implement 'operation fool the masses'. What triggered it Paul? Gas prices over $4.13/gallon and it's a go? Thank you for pulling the scales from my eyes Paul, I feel so much better now.

[Peikko 1,575]

Not even for now. The GOP is using the UBL conversation as cover to pass this when no one is looking.

And remember that GOPers always say (when it comes to big oil) that the money one gets back due to tax breaks or deductions is actually your own money, not the governments. Apparently that logic does not hold when it comes to abortion. Read on.

House passes restrictive anti-abortion package

By Kathleen Hennessey, Tribune Washington Bureau

May 4, 2011, 2:47 p.m.

WASHINGTON — The House of Representatives on Wednesday approved a sweeping anti-abortion package to further distance federal funds from the procedure by solidifying existing measures and imposing new ones.

...

Under the measure ... individuals could not deduct the cost of an abortion when itemizing health expenses on their taxes, nor could they use tax-exempt savings account to pay for an abortion.

...

Democrats and abortion rights advocates argue ... the tax deduction provision could force victims of rape or incest to have to show proof of the crime to an IRS agent.

"We should not use the tax code to force women to relive their ordeal to a IRS agent," said Rep. Jackie Speier, a California Democrat who recently revealed in an emotional floor speech that she once had an abortion.

Totally disgusting trying to exclude a legal procedure from being accessible to vast numbers of women. 'No dear, you can't have an abortion so you can undergo life saving treatment unless you pay out of pocket, your baby is worth more than you are so just die already - but not until you've carried that precious baby American to term'

[Little_My 464]

Not even for now. The GOP is using the UBL conversation as cover to pass this when no one is looking.

And remember that GOPers always say (when it comes to big oil) that the money one gets back due to tax breaks or deductions is actually your own money, not the governments. Apparently that logic does not hold when it comes to abortion. Read on.

Ah yes. Wonderful. Has anyone asked Obama to produce Osama's long form birth certificate yet?

[^_^ 5,021]

Totally disgusting trying to exclude a legal procedure from being accessible to vast numbers of women. 'No dear, you can't have an abortion so you can undergo life saving treatment unless you pay out of pocket, your baby is worth more than you are so just die already - but not until you've carried that precious baby American to term'

Well, the good news is Democrats still control the Senate and the White House. So this will not become law just yet. Maybe in 2013.

[Vi-Jay 218]

but who the hell knows if there was or if there wasn't. It is all useless speculation at this point.

Exactly.

Nobody really knows except, our elitist govt., UBL, witnesses and the Seals.

The speculation is not "useless". Q&A / check and balance, are "must" components of a democratic govt. / society.

and, Why the "speculation"? Blame it on the rain?

The "official story" is a moving target. Evolving daily as they fine tune their lies?

I refuse to accept what I am told by our govt. They have lied to the PEOPLE too many times.

Think on this, please;

The "current" story is that UBL was first shot in the chest and then the head. Play those logistics in your imagination.

Chest shot - he fell to the floor.

Head shot - Seal standing over him.

Blown out skull - exit wound.

Show the evidence so forensic experts can make the conclusion? Nope. Can't do that.

Sorry, forensic experts might feel nauseous and encited to a violent reaction.

Edited May 5, 2011 by Vi-Jay

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Of course, why not? The vast government conspiracy theory. Everyone in govmint has known that Bin Laden's whereabouts were known for years and years and have just been waiting for the perfect time to implement 'operation fool the masses'. What triggered it Paul? Gas prices over $4.13/gallon and it's a go? Thank you for pulling the scales from my eyes Paul, I feel so much better now.

Needing a boost in approval ratings? Something to push the birth certificate thing out of the news? A need for increased security measures to 'reassure' people the Patriot Act is AOK still. I mean after all, we are putting metal dectectors back in places they weren't, increasing security all around, more searches, pat downs, etc. already... Everything is always about 'timing.'

'Everyone' doesn't need to know either. Just look at the multiple instances of insiders who have been a part of the past 3 administrations in one way or another.

Just look at how the story is changing every moment it seems.

First Osama was armed and firing... then he wasn't.

First there was a video.... then there wasn't.

First we had photos..... no now you can't see them.

First there was a body.... but we threw it overboard.

First it was a huge battle in the mansion..... now only 1 person was armed out of the 5 killed.

All we have is government officials coming out and 'telling us' that he was allegedly shot/killed.

I'm sorry that I don't buy this for the umpteeth time he's been 'allegedly' said to be dead by people, including 3 or 4 times in the past by government officials who were 'pretty sure' he had been killed already.

You can disagree with my assessment all you want, but I need a little more than the government just 'telling me' how it is.