Seymour Hersh: Story About Killing Osama Bin Laden is One Big Lie

[babsbunny]

http://www.alternet.org/media/seymour-hersh-story-about-killing-osama-bin-laden-one-big-lie?akid=10983.38044.3iPMRk&rd=1&src=newsletter902420&t=3

Plus, 90% of lamestream editors should be fired.

September 27, 2013 |


Seymour Hersh has got some extreme ideas on how to fix journalism – close down the news bureaus of NBC and ABC, sack 90% of editors in publishing and get back to the fundamental job of journalists which, he says, is to be an outsider.

It doesn't take much to fire up Hersh, the investigative journalist who has been the nemesis of US presidents since the 1960s and who was once described by the Republican party as "the closest thing American journalism has to a terrorist".

[Romulox]

1. OBL was likely *executed* in cold blood. The story about a shoot out is obviously bogus.

Then they dumped his body at sea, to dispose of the evidence.

[randome]

3. Why is anything 'likely' or 'obvious'?

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[AlbertCat]

128. What story about a "shoot out"?

I don't think that describes the official story at all.

[randome]

199. I believe the WH itself said things happened differently from first reported.

If they were lying, why would they admit to being mistaken?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[Nuclear Unicorn]

4. I'm trying to imagine

who would make an issue of this if it were true. I don't see the EU, the GOP, Russia, China or anyone else demanding "justice for Bin Laden." No one of any consequence, anyway.

[Romulox]

6. Summary execution is a war crime. If you are arguing "Might makes right", well, there is no need

for any discussion, then.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

8. I'm not saying might makes right. I'm saying nobody cares; including UBL

He made a deliberate choice to operate as illegally as possible. He accepted no human government. This is the end he expected.

[Romulox]

11. That's an obviously false statement, as you and I (and Mr. Hersh) are discussing it.

What you mean is that nobody who is powerful cares.

"He made a deliberate choice to operate as illegally as possible. He accepted no human government. This is the end he expected."

"Summary execution" means killing someone for past crimes without any trial or the due process of law. The reason it is a War Crime is that who are you to decide who has "made a deliberate choice to operate as illegally as possible"? The due process of law, in fact, is what is supposed to distinguish our "civilized" way of life from OBL's.

[Hydra]

33. Nail, meet hammer

I continue to be amused that the AUMF(which was crazy to begin with) had no references to Al-Queda or Bin-Laden, an no effort was made to actually make a legal case against either of them. We were just supposed to accept the word of Bushco that they were responsible.

Cuz you know, there was nothing funny going in during 9/11...no treason at work here!

[demwing]

68. Obviously? You keep using that word...

[Romulox]

73. We are all here, discussing. So "nobody cares" is just a silly non-starter. nt

[demwing]

77. "The story about a shoot out is obviously bogus"

Obvioulsy?

[Romulox]

82. Ahem..."White House changes story: Bin Laden unarmed"

Osama bin Laden, the al Qaeda leader who liked to pose with a menacing AK-47 assault rifle in his hand or by his side, was discovered without a gun by the Navy SEALs who barged into his room and shot him dead.

The White House on Tuesday gave a more complete picture of the assault — and corrected some key details from earlier official accounts — as the team that pulled off the storied raid in Pakistan briefed officials and rested back at Andrews Air Force Base outside Washington.

<snip>

White House officials initially suggested bin Laden had been holding a gun and perhaps firing at U.S. forces. The corrected account raised questions about whether the Americans ever planned to take him alive, or simply were out to kill him.

http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-250_162-20059562.html

[Romulox]

90. They knew he was incapacitated on the ground when he was shot in the chest, and killed. nt

[pnwmom]

110. You were there? How do you know these details? n/t

[Romulox]

112. Jay Carney is a spokesman for the White House. The story covers his remarks. nt

[Th1onein]

258. Sounds like a summary execution to me. But why the surprise?

Under this administration, we've already killed a US citizen with drones. In for a penny, in for a pound, I guess.

Wonder who's next? You? Me? When the rule of law fails, we are all in danger.

[pnwmom]

106. Which proves your earlier statement wrong. Having access to his body wouldn't have

proved anything. The US had already acknowledged that he wasn't one of the shooters.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

84. First, you have zero evidence there was an execution, summary or otherwise.

Mr Hersch has made an allegation. His evidence remains to be seen.

The article also says everything about the raid was a lie. Near as I can tell I see no reason to doubt US special operators flew in using stealth helicopters, raided the compound and UBL and several others were killed. His body was then dumped at see after photographic evidence confirming his death was collected.

What you mean is that nobody who is powerful cares.

If someone would like to step forward and argue before some court how unfair life has been for UBL I would be delighted to watch. Maybe al Zawahiri could put in an appearance for his old chum's sake. Do you suppose he might?

[Romulox]

87. The accounts of the SEALs, posted below, are evidence. nt

[Shivering Jemmy]

104. Nope

[Romulox]

113. Touché. nt

[kelliekat44]

94. Are we less civilized than Israel or France? nt

[creeksneakers2]

142. Due process is for crimes

This is war. Do you have magistrates out on battlefields signing warrants before troops can shoot back?

[Recursion]

48. Summary execution of pirates is and always has been legal

Under the doctrine of hosti humani generis; that's been applied several times to international terrorists as well.

[Romulox]

55. LOL. nt

[Recursion]

124. What?

Did you not know that?

[treestar]

171. Well apparently, it would not have been OK for

the people on Flight 93 to kill the hijackers - not without a trial!

[leveymg]

57. It's a crime only if someone treats it as such. Nobody ever will in this case.

[Romulox]

65. Too true. And the whole truth about 9/11? Down to the bottom of the sea. nt

[demwing]

74. Quick question - You believe the story of OBLs death is a lie

yet you believe the story of his body sitting on the ocean floor?

hmmm....

[Romulox]

76. It probably happened as the SEALs who I quote, below, said it did. There was no shootout with OBL.

It's the official story of 9/11 thats a lie, the full truth of which is at the bottom of the sea.

[leveymg]

96. Even if there was a shootout, they could have captured him - if that was their mission.

All they literally had to do was to take four steps forward, reach out and grab him, and haul him downstairs to a waiting chopper. But, they didn't. If he was indeed firing, step back, toss a stun grenade - two guys carry him to the chopper. The SEAL team was covered head-to-toe with body armor. UBL wasn't.

Capture was not the mission. Hersh is right - the official story is almost all a lie.

[mythology]

269. Because there's no history of terrorists blowing themselves up?

Why not suggest they could have shot him in the leg too? Under the circumstances, I don't think there was a good way to take him alive and maintain troop safety.

[leveymg]

270. High-risk is part of that job. If they wanted to capture him alive, he'd be in a cell right now.

Special Forces routinely enter areas where they might be killed. It's what they do. Capturing UBL presented a very low risk relative to some other missions they carry out.

If absolute safety were the priority, the command authority would have simply exercised the option to reduce the villa to a smoking crater with an air strike using B-2 bombers. But, they wanted to make absolutely certain they killed him.

Clearly, everything about how this mission was planned and carried out indicates the purpose was to to kill bin Laden and not under any circumstances to keep him alive to testify. That would have created enormous complications that no one wanted to deal with. That's all there is to it.

[onenote]

297. Hersh didn't say the official story is "almost all a lie."

He said it was "one big lie" and that "not a word of it" was true. So I guess you're saying Hersh is a liar.

[leveymg]

298. You're getting into petty semantics and ascribing your own conclusion to me.

Don't try to twist what I said to suit yourself. What I take Hersh to be saying is that the official story is riddled with inaccuracies (various versions from various officials and spokespeople claimed several different and conflicting things), and as a whole the official story gives an entirely misleading impression that this wasn't an assassination. It was. Hersh is right.

[treestar]

193. You are saying the truth about 911 would have been with OBL

I seriously doubt you'll find many in your camp on that.

OBL is not a person of upright integrity and credibility. Why would you believe him over the SEALs, Eric Holder, or indeed any official of the American government.

[2banon]

240. This whole thing put the kibosh on Bin Laden killed in Dec 2001 reports

Sort of slammed shut any further discussion wrt those reports that were largely unmentioned/censored/ignored back during dubya's reign of terror.

Benazir Bhutto mentioned OBL murdered by Omar Sheikh (sp?) in passing during an interview with BBC David Frost, this segment focused on death threats against her during her presidential campaign.. just before she was in fact assassinated, in 2007.

[demwing]

242. And where do the lies end?

How do you know the "real" story narrated by the SEAL team is factual? They could be covering up the fact the OBL is in Gitmo on 24/7 waterboard.

My point is that when you think that the official reports are no better than fictional stories, then you believe that the story tellers are liars. Why then continue to believe ANYTHING the lying story tellers have to say?

[EX500rider]

216. Did he raise his hands and cry out "I surrender!"?

If not you may assume he may be wearing a suicide vest and act accordingly.

[EX500rider]

260. Summary execution happens after you surrender...

.....killing the enemy who haven't surrendered is considered legal warfare.

[Warren DeMontague]

266. Flying airplanes into skyscrapers is probably a war crime, too.

[zappaman]

272. Like that matters to the "blame America first" crowd.

Sheesh...

[Warren DeMontague]

274. The threads at the time of OBL's killing were something else, indeed.

Like the shit about how he was a "kindly little old man who loved to play ball with the neighborhood kids", who was "shot mercilessly in his jammies"

[zappaman]

276. I remember being quite embaressed that I shared a party affiliation with those

that cried over OBL not "getting a fair trial".
Of course, saying that OBL got exactly what he deserved (and likely knew was coming), meant one was a "warmonger" and a person "with no feelings".

[Nuclear Unicorn]

291. yet, those in the same party calling Obama a war criminal

still voted for his reelection because he is in the same party. That speaks more to their pretend outrage than to their accusations.

[2banon]

282. Wow

you said:

Like that matters to the "blame America first" crowd.

At first glance I thought the sarcasm coda was forgotten. Reading down a couple posts I realized you were serious.

This is the first time (for me) to see that meme used (in this vein) on this site..

[Romulox]

7. Also, why lie if it doesn't matter?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

9. "They lied cuz it's illegal, we know it's illegal cuz they lied" is a circular argument.

[Romulox]

12. When you can't argue the points an opponent has made, simply argue against one of your own creation.

[DireStrike]

32. No, I think he's got you there.

The series of posts you just made are circular. You haven't given any evidence for your conclusions.

edit: up to that point in the thread. Maybe there is evidence below.

[Romulox]

41. It's called a strawman argument when you attribute something to your opponent only

to argue against it. It's particularly egregious when a poster puts quotation marks around a point that only they have made in order to argue against that point. It goes from lazy to dishonest, at that point.

You'll notice the same poster has ignored the far more substantive response to him, above.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

64. "the same poster has ignored the far more substantive response to him, above"

I was away from my keyboard. Sheesh.

BTW -- I'm a her not a him.

[Romulox]

66. You had time to put quotation marks around something I hadn't said. That takes a second or two! nt

[Nuclear Unicorn]

86. Whatever, dude. If you're that hungry for a win...

[Romulox]

88. That's just how quotes work. nt

[Hydra]

37. The NSA proves you incorrect.

They ARE lying because it's totally illegal. We need the truth from whoever to get a clear narrative, but until then, we don't have to accept "This is all completely legal and authorized by the American people."

[DevonRex]

215. You're seriously misinterpreting that story. He was not executed.

The point man is the one who killed Bin Laden when he stuck his head out the door. He shot him in the head, gravely wounding him. The point man then gathered the women in the room in his arms in case they had bombs strapped to them, to shield the other 2 SEALS from the blast.

The one called "shooter" claimed to be the killer. Maybe he shot Bin Laden in the forehead. Maybe he didn't. But he did shoot him in the chest after Bin Laden was already down.

The "lies" are that "shooter" claims to be the killer. The point man is the one who shot Bin Laden in the forehead when he stuck his head out of the door. Point Man believed Bin Laden might have had a weapon in his hand behind the door. A reasonable assumption, given all the time it had taken and noise that had happened to get to the top floor where Bin Laden was. Good god, helicopters landing, one crashing, guns firing, explosives detonating to open doors. Of course Point Man would assume the terrorist would be armed by that time.

Therefore, there was No Summary Execution.

[Romulox]

16. The firsthand accounts of the soldiers who participated...

What actually happened the night of the raid, according to the SEAL Team 6 operator who I interviewed, is that the "point man" ran up the stairs to the top floor and shot bin Laden in the head when he saw what looked like bin Laden poking his head out of his bedroom door. The shot gravely wounded al Qaeda's leader.

Having taken down bin Laden, the point man proceeded to rush two women he found in the bedroom, gathering them in his arms to absorb the explosion in case they were wearing suicide vests, something that was a real concern of those who planned the raid.

Two more SEALs then entered bin Laden's bedroom and, seeing that the al Qaeda leader was lying mortally wounded on the floor, finished him off with shots to the chest.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/26/world/bergen-who-killed-bin-laden/index.html

[randome]

20. They should have called an ambulance, first.

Then waited 30 days for the paramedic caravan to arrive over the mountains.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[randome]

24. Oh, I understand the concept of treating our enemes as well as ourselves.

But this was deep in Pakistani mountainous region. And OBL was a self-proclaimed enemy of the country who convinced others to die for his cause. This was the next 'best' thing to war. And in war, you don't give due process to combatants.

So, yeah, I'm not that concerned about the details of how he died, either. I'm also against the death penalty but I don't lose any sleep when an outright monster dies via lethal injection.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[Romulox]

23. To shoot and kill a wounded, unarmed man, you mean? nt

[Romulox]

27. That's a War Crime, irrespective of whether you think "he had it coming". nt

[Romulox]

34. Again, if facts don't matter, it's all just "might makes right", and no discussion is needed.

You obviously haven't read ANY of the accounts of the SEALs who actually conducted the operation, or none of this would be news to you. This isn't my or Mr. Hersch's version.

[Romulox]

43. If you "don't care", why are you here, arguing? nt

[Romulox]

47. It's a dumb question, as SEALs are not lawyers or judges. nt

[Romulox]

52. Neither are most of us, but we are all bound by the rules of law. nt

[Romulox]

71. We are signatories to the Geneva Conventions, as well as bound by the general laws of war. Those

govern, along with US criminal law.

[Romulox]

85. This is why I mentioned your low post count: discussion forums don't work this way. nt

[Romulox]

109. No. I mean discussions are back and forths. You can't ignore points I've made, and questions I've

asked, while demanding answers to your latest thoughts. Discussion forums don't work that way.

[Romulox]

116. This isn't a court of law. The standards of evidence for discussion are much lower. Again,

this is just how "discussion forums" work.

[Romulox]

131. There is "evidence" of a War Crime. "Proof" is determined in a Court of Law. This is tedious. nt

[Dr Hobbitstein]

121. Members with low post counts can't question

ridiculous assertions from members with high post counts? I thought discussion forums were for the discussion of topics related to said forum, regardless of how many posts you've made...

[Buddyblazon]

175. If you want to take that route... I've been here years longer than you...

so by your reasoning, I've got seniority here. And I say discussion forums work any way they want. Such is the beauty of online message boards and forums. Don't be the brat making up new rules to Tag in real time to benefit your argument.

And I agree with Tex here. I am happier than a pig in shit that he's dead. Hooray Seal Team Six! Way to finish the job!

Have a day.

[treestar]

134. US criminal law does not apply out side of the US

and certainly not in a war zone. Sheesh.

[Romulox]

136. You are simply wrong on this point. US criminal law absolutely applies to US citizens acting

outside of the US. And there was no "war" declared on Pakistan.

[treestar]

138. No you are wrong

We don't have courts set up in Pakistan.

War is what it is. All's fair. There was no breach of international norms in the killing of UBL. It's ODS or American Derangement Syndrome to use this particular incident that way. It's one thing we did that was right.

[Romulox]

145. The PROTECT Act of 2003 (Sex Tourism) is a small example of overseas behavior criminalized

PROTECT Act of 2003

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The PROTECT Act of 2003 (Pub.L. 108–21, 117 Stat. 650, S. 151, enacted April 30, 2003) is a United States law with the stated intent of preventing child abuse.[1][2] "PROTECT" is a backronym which stands for "Prosecutorial Remedies and Other Tools to end the Exploitation of Children Today".

<snip>

The law has the following effects:[1][4]

Provides for mandatory life imprisonment of sex offenses against a minor if the offender has had a prior conviction of abuse against a minor, with some exceptions.

Establishes a program to obtain criminal history background checks for volunteer organizations.

Authorizes wiretapping and monitoring of other communications in all cases related to child abuse or kidnapping.

Eliminates statutes of limitations for child abduction or child abuse.

Bars pretrial release of persons charged with specified offenses against or involving children.

Assigns a national AMBER Alert Coordinator.

Implemented Suzanne's Law. Named after Suzanne Lyall, a missing college student of the University of New York at Albany, the law eliminates waiting periods before law enforcement agencies will investigate reports of missing persons ages 18–21. These reports are also filed with the NCIC.

Prohibits computer-generated child pornography when &quot B) such visual depiction is a computer image or computer-generated image that is, or appears virtually indistinguishable from that of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; (as amended by 1466A for Section 2256(8)(B) of title 18, United States Code).

Prohibits drawings, sculptures, and pictures of such drawings and sculptures depicting minors in actions or situations that meet the Miller test of being obscene, OR are engaged in sex acts that are deemed to meet the same obscene condition. The law does not explicitly state that images of fictional beings who appear to be under 18 engaged in sexual acts that are not deemed to be obscene are rendered illegal in and of their own condition (illustration of sex of fictional minors). Maximum sentence of 5 years for possession, 10 years for distribution.

Authorizes fines and/or imprisonment for up to 30 years for U.S. citizens or residents who engage in illicit sexual conduct abroad, with or without the intent of engaging in such sexual misconduct.[5]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROTECT_Act_of_2003

[treestar]

149. Oh really so we are going to go into say Uganda

and look for people, who've never been to the United States or contacted anyone there, to see if they disobeyed this law?

And there is no law passed saying that warmongers against us are to be given a trial in the US before being killed on a battlefield.

[Romulox]

150. The overseas behavior is prosecuted in the US. Really...why argue points if you don't know

what you're talking about? Like...at ALL.

One more time:

Authorizes fines and/or imprisonment for up to 30 years for U.S. citizens or residents who engage in illicit sexual conduct abroad, with or without the intent of engaging in such sexual misconduct.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROTECT_Act_of_2003

[treestar]

151. Has anyone been forced from another country to the US

to stand trial on these charges? Probably applies only to US citizens or people who eventually are in the US at some point.

And why would you be OK with it as you think it operates? It would mean the US truly claims jurisdiction over the entire planet.

[Romulox]

152. That's called "extradition". This is basic stuff, getting outside the scope of this discussion. nt

[treestar]

155. What countries will voluntarily extradite their citizens to the US

for the sole purpose of being tried for something that violates US law, by someone on their soil, over whom they have jurisdiction? That would be bowing to the US as having sovereignty over their own territory!

Again, the law you quoted likely includes some US connection.

[Romulox]

160. If you don't read what I'm posting, I don't see how we can discuss anything.

Please read before posting any more. The dark part is the most important. For the THIRD time:

Authorizes fines and/or imprisonment for up to 30 years for U.S. citizens or residents who engage in illicit sexual conduct abroad, with or without the intent of engaging in such sexual misconduct.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROTECT_Act_of_2003

So your idea that behavior comited overseas by US citizens and residents is not subject to criminal prosecution in the US is simply incorrect.

[treestar]

162. But not non-US citizens

We don't have jurisdiction over the entire world.

War is war. So far we have not enacted statutes requiring trials for war enemies before shooting them. So your example does not support your idealistic concept anyway.

[Romulox]

165. Are you really unfamiliar with the Geneva Conventions? The Trials at Nuremberg???

"So far we have not enacted statutes requiring trials for war enemies before shooting them."

Umm...

[treestar]

169. International law is a different thing from a US statute

Each nation has sovereignty to carry out its laws. International laws are nice ideals but hard to enforce. There is no international police force or authority. Until we have the one world government that the right wing is so afraid of.

No, we don't have US statutes saying US soldiers can't fight wars without trials for every enemy they attack. Sheesh.

[jberryhill]

255. You should read the actual text of the statute, instead of a summary

The crime is not "having illicit sex abroad", it is traveling for the purpose of doing so. The predicate act of traveling is committed in the US.

[2banon]

249. I don't recall U.S. declaring war on Pakistan... when did that happen?

[treestar]

251. It didn't.

[2banon]

283. Indeed. Thank You Romulox!

[treestar]

132. Not in war.

UBL committed "war crimes" didn't he?

[Romulox]

137. We weren't at war with Pakistan. nt

[treestar]

154. Pakistan did not see it as an attack against their nation

In fact, they saw it as assistance to them with a real problem.

[Romulox]

161. Then it doesn't sound like "war" at all. nt

[treestar]

163. There are allies in wars

The French did not complain when we killed Germans on their soil.

[2banon]

281. actually this is not how I remembered Pakistan's reactions.

The government was outraged and so were the Pakistani people for violation of sovereignty... our press gave it some mention for a short time, but quickly put the "ignore button" on that inconvenient story.

Don't know what we paid them to pipe down and chill-out.. it'd be an interesting factoid to research I suppose.

[treestar]

303. Well

May 17, 2011 - Sen. John Kerry announces that Pakistan will return the tail of the U.S. helicopter damaged during the raid that killed Osama bin Laden.

May 18, 2011 - Admiral Mike Mullen and Defense Secretary Robert Gates tell reporters there is no evidence that the senior Pakistani leadership knew of Osama bin Laden's presence in Pakistan.

May 26, 2011 - A team of CIA forensic specialists is granted permission by the Pakistani government to examine the compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan.

June 15, 2011 - Pakistan's intelligence agency arrests several people suspected of assisting the CIA before the raid.

July 11, 2011 - Pakistani security forces detain a doctor suspected of helping the CIA attempt to collect the DNA of bin Laden's family members through a vaccination drive.

October 6, 2011 - Pakistan's information ministry says the doctor suspected of helping the CIA target Osama bin Laden will be charged with treason. Also, bin Laden's compound will be turned over to city officials.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/09/world/death-of-osama-bin-laden-fast-facts/index.html


You're right. It even looks like they wanted bin Laden to remain alive or not identified. In which case, too bad for them, then. Why are they punishing people who tried to help find him? A mixed bag, too, as they seem to also have cooperated somewhat, after the fact.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

302. That's an untrue statement.

You can't just make stuff up about how much Pakistan loves us for killing Bin Laden. That's not how things went down.

[tritsofme]

195. No, but the 2001 AUMF gave the president clear authority to act. This is silly.

[EX500rider]

222. Didn't have to be at war with Pakistan....

.......we would have followed Hitler (ohh, ohh GODWIN ALERT!) into any country he retreated to and it would be up to that country to decide if they wanted to go to war over the intrusion.....it seems Pakistan has decided to let it slide.

[demwing]

92. A "war crime" is determined by international consensus

What happens when/if the consensus changes?

[Romulox]

93. "Might makes right" is what we've had for most of human history. My real concern is for the truth

of the matter regard 9/11 and the Saudi connection.

[demwing]

99. So you're saying that you don't believe bin Laden was responsible?

What "truth of the matter regarding 9/11" do you not yet possess that bin Laden could have supplied?

[Romulox]

117. I'm saying what's in my posts. I'm not going to refute arguments I haven't made. nt

[demwing]

184. Then maybe just answer the question

What "truth of the matter regarding 9/11" do you not yet possess that bin Laden could have supplied?

[demwing]

231. Romulox, I know you can't reply...but at least consider the following

You think bin Laden could have information that would reveal some truths about 9/11.

Not sure what truths you're looking for, but think for a moment. Is OBL the sort that would have negotiated such information for his peaceful and protected surrender?

If he was, why didn't he? He had plenty of opportunity...

What if we offered him entry into some sort of international witness relocation program. Was OBL the type that would have sold out his allies for some cash and a new identity?

Doubtful for two reasons:

1. He had wealth, and gave it up for his hate. He was willing to make personal sacrifices. He lived in a cave, and then in a complex from which he never left. No indication given that we had anything to offer him that he valued.

2. He was the leader of a movement populated with radical extremists willing to kill for him and die for him. What a power trip!

Sell out and you piss off all those jihadis you previously inspired. That's bad juju, sure to reduce your life expectancy.

Death at the hands of Americans, on the other hand, elevates him to the status of martyr (and oh! BTW Mr. Bin Laden, say hello to your heavenly virgins!).

OBL had no reason to cooperate. The only way we would ever get him to speak is through torture. Of course, whatever information came from that torture would be unreliable. People will eventually say just about anything to stop the torture, right?

Not to mention that torture is a war crime.

[demwing]

238. Ahh...thanks, will edit my post /nt.

[treestar]

139. Might includes taking controls of a plane by force

and using it to kill everyone on it and some others in a building.

[EX500rider]

220. Actually I don't think it is..

If he had had his hands in the air and said he surrendered then it would be a war crime.

A enemy has to neither have a gun in his hands or be threatening you to be shot.
He just has to not have surrendered and be the enemy.

If a sniper has a bead on a enemy General sitting in his command tent can he take the shot? yes.

If a recon patrol stumbles into a enemy patrol's camp they can kill them all in their sleep and not be a war crime.

[dotymed]

98. The facts that OBL knew

probably would have blown us away.
Instead, he was blown away because of his knowledge.

[zeemike]

101. Well if they are trained to commit war crimes

Then it is the trainers that are guilty of it...that is what Nuremberg was all about.

[zeemike]

120. I said if.

How could I or you for that matter know?...they did the mission and they control the evidence.
And if you believe they are going to release any of the evidence then you are mistaken.
But what they did say was all we know, that the point man shot him in the head when he stuck his head out...so the intent then was to kill him IMO....summery execution.

But they did something even more troubling to me...they normalized it and now there are some on a liberal board that think it is normal.

[EX500rider]

224. That's what you do on a raid into a enemy compound..

....you shoot any enemy who doesn't have his hands up.

The SEALS aren't a SWAT team who surrounds you and tells you to come out with your hands up...they are a military squad who kills people on the other side who aren't trying to actively surrender at the moment. As they should.

[zeemike]

241. You mean like the SS?

Yes I know we can and we do create squads to murder people with...so did Hitler...
But we held the ones that created them to account and did not justify it like we have done with this.
But alas, this is what happens when you create the madness of war...you convince people to do things which in reality are crimes against humanity..

[EX500rider]

246. "You mean like the SS?"

No, I mean like any military squad anywhere who comes across enemy who haven't surrendered. Killing enemy combatants isn't considered murder but warfare.

The SS rounded up innocent villagers and killed them AFTER they had surrendered based on their religious or political beliefs.

Don't see the difference?

[zeemike]

250. And also killed them before they had the chance to surrender.

If they wanted to.
And they were trained to be that way, because might is right....but warfare is murder.
But what makes it wrong is when we convince ourselves that it is not because we can find a justification for it...and justifications are given to us all the time, but the ones responsible for it.
They are cheep to manufacture.

[EX500rider]

256. So I guess you don't see the difference...

SS=SEAL Team6?

[zeemike]

259. No I see the difference.

But then I am not a ether/or thinker.
The world is not a black and white thing...the good guys are not always right and the bad guys always wrong...and I understand that evil can be done by anyone if they are given the justification for doing it. The evil in things is in the act not in the justification for it.
And in fact there have been studies that show it.

[EX500rider]

261. Killing enemies who haven't surrendered...

....is less an "evil thing" and more standard operating procedure in armies around the world.

[zeemike]

271. And they are enemies whether armed or not?

And deserve to die?...I am sure that OBL was a threat to them even if he was in his bed sleeping...he could have had a big bomb in bed with him....or one of those weapons of mass destruction we hear so much about.
But I don't deny it is SOP...but that is the problem...it has become SOP.
And we like it because we have been trained with fear.

[EX500rider]

275. yes, members of AQ are self-described enemies of the US...

......whether holding a gun or not.

US service members are not required to give the enemy warning, let them pick up a weapon and get ready before shooting. It's not a duel.

[zeemike]

277. All of this makes me sad.

to see this once great country drop all morality out of fear of an enemy that has no army to invade with and may not even exist as far as we know.
But I can not change things with my words and we must suffer the consequences of our actions before we will ever change...just as all the good Germans had to do.

[TheKentuckian]

166. You aren't interested in proof at all but rather shutting down the whole discussion.

If you were interested in proof then you'd be demanding it from those who have the blow by blow.

The latest generation of proof demanders never, ever demand it from those sitting on the data. NEVER, in fact in virtually the same breath trust, benefit of the doubt, and any and every kind of technocratic hair splitting is demanded for those with full access to the facts to protect their ability to keep any and all proof to themselves.

It is reasonable to call someone a liar who keeps the truth willfully hidden.

[tblue37]

28. If that SEAL gathered the women in his arms to absorb a

potential explosion, then he was brave indeed, regardless of what else one might say of him.

I am not sure executing OBL that way would constitute a war crime, though. Imagine a US or a US-led stealth assault on the armed compound of a dangerous Columbian drug lord. The whole point of stealth would be to arrest the guy without rousing the whole compound. If he offered resistance, or if they feared he would raise an alarm, the operatives would probably wound or kill him, because thir operation is a kind of battle in an ongoing "war," and they know they would be outnumbered if the camp is awakened an warned.

I doubt that anyone would worry about such a stealth assault or its outcome, even if its original or ostensible purpose was to arrest rather than to kill the guy.

My main concern is that I have never been 100% convinced that OBL's role in 9/11 was quite what we were told, and I have always worried that TPTB prefered for him to be silenced rather than deposed. I am not quite a "truther," but I am kind of borderline on that issue.

[Romulox]

30. Read the accounts--OBL was the last male "accounted for". He was killed in cold blood

(meaning not in the heat of battle.)

"I doubt that anyone would worry about such a stealth assault or its outcome, even if its original or ostensible purpose was to arrest rather than to kill the guy. "

So an arrest warrant is equal to a death warrant? That doesn't sound right.

"My main concern is that I have never been 100% convinced that OBL's role in 9/11 was quite what we were told, and I have always worried that TPTB prefered for him to be silenced rather than deposed. I am not quite a "truther," but I am kind of borderline on that issue."

Well they killed the man and quickly dumped him in the sea. Since dead men tell no tales, I guess we'll just have to assume justice was done, won't we?

[Hydra]

38. It certainly silences the issue of questioning Bushco about what happened on 9/11

"Justice" was served.

Like you, I would have like them to have arrested Bin-Laden and had him stand trial. I'm sure we would have learned interesting things.

[treestar]

157. OBL would not have much credibility

if he started blaming Bushco or anyone else.

In fact, hadn't he already boasted of being behind it?

[Hydra]

168. Why wouldn't he have credibility?

He was our man for a LONG time, and could tell us all about what Poppy Bush had been doing for a lot of years. Regarding 9/11, we have evidence that Bush knew it was coming and ignored it, and we can't get a straight answer out of anyone about it via inquiries. They also let Bin Laden escape at Tora Bora, so I don't buy the line that he was somehow important to this terror war.

But it's clear from this thread that not many care to find the truth of what happened. Ironic- Bushco built this lie, and now it's accepted as the truth since this admin didn't prosecute them.

[treestar]

170. Really? A person who admitted he was behind a plot

that used terrorist means to kill people in the US (who were not military, but just going about their day) would have credibility?

In a claim that he had nothing to do with it?

[Hydra]

173. WTH?

I didn't once say that he did or did not plan 9/11. We simply don't know, and we needed to for this to be legal, if that's what we killed him for.

If we killed him for the previous bombings we DID try him and convict him for(but did not give a death sentence), was that appropriate?

I find it entirely convenient for Bushco that there was not a trial, and we did not get to the bottom of how a terrorist attack was allowed on our soil when the FBI, using the pre 9/11 rules and laws, had no trouble finding the plot and wanted permission to stop it.

Now, we'll never know. The designated perpetrator is dead.

[treestar]

194. Like OBL would have told the truth?

I take it you are against torture. OBL did lead a group that would kill themselves in order to kill Americans. This person who hated Americans that much would have voluntarily and truthfully told us who really did it? If he claimed Bushco told him to do it, that would hardly be credible!

[Hydra]

208. Like further upthread, you are missing the point

We can and should have asked him to speak about his business with Bushco back when he was our ally. We don't need him to speak to have a trial, but we DO need him to be alive to have one, which is probably the only way we ever would have gotten a full investigation into 9/11 during our lifetime.

You may want to dust off your history books and look at how we did things before the Neocons got in control. You don't make exceptions to the law to kill people we don't like...unless you think Russia and China's MOs are good for us to adopt.

[treestar]

252. Alive he would not have told us a blasted thing

And anything he did tell us would be highly suspect.

[tblue37]

46. Well, I don't assume that, because as I said, I am not convinced

that his role in 9/11 was what is claimed, and I think he needed to be deposed rather than killed.

I was just saying that if those in the world who have the power to adjudicate war crimes do believe he did all he is claimed to have done, and if everyone, including the SEAL assault team, believed him to be heavily armed or protected by many heavily armed men, then they would not accuse the team of a war crime for killing him, even if he wasn't armed or protected, because the team in the moment would have believed he was.

A shot fired under such circumstances, because the shooter believed he would be shot if he did not quickly disable the enemy, would probably be waved away, not charged as a war crime, even if the fear that provoked the shot turned out to be based on false information.

After the head shot, though, the shots that killed him, especially if he was already mortally wounded, can be viewed as a coup de grace, not an execution. Coup de graces occur more often on the battlefield and in other such circumstances than we moderns are comfortable knowing about.

If he was mortally wounded, they could have just left him to suffer and die. He would have been just as eliminated. But they didn't want to let his burial site turn into a martyr's shrine for terrorists.

[rhett o rick]

179. We dont know other than what we've been told. It would be nice if we could

flatly believe the government, but that, in my mind is very foolish. I dont believe Mr. Hersch anymore than other theories, but I am not afraid of any of them either. I figure I can think for myself. I strongly believe our government would lie to us if they thought it was in our best interest (or really in their best interest). I also think that if they could capture OBL, they would do it as he would be a great source of intelligence. Seems a little to pat to me that they shot him and dumped him off a ship into the ocean. I also understand the need for some to have issues like this all buttoned up and tied with a bow. Easier on the mind.

[Enthusiast]

293. "We dont know other than what we've been told."

Exactly. I no longer believe what we are told by the government. They have compromised their credibility.

[rhett o rick]

295. Authoritarians think they know what's best for us and treat us accordingly.

I am strongly skeptical while some here want so badly to be able to "follow" someone. I believe the need to follow comes from much of our religious upbringings. Religions are authoritarian in structure and many, want followers. Therefore, they dont teach skepticism. They teach "faith".

I noticed someone above got PPR'd. Do you know who?

[2banon]

244. Hersch has a checkered past? Really?

I missed the checkered past part of his career in investigative journalism. Enlighten please?

[samsingh]

15. i'm not sure you can say killed in cold blood about obl

[Romulox]

18. I have not an ounce of pity. But this is how myths and propaganda is made. nt

[Junkdrawer]

17. I think Hersh is saying the WHOLE story is a steaming pile....

Phony as the dye in OBL's beard.

[brush]

102. We won't know that until someone . . .

comes forward to say the shootout didn't happen. There were surviving wives and kids, right? At some point we might hear their stories, or the stories of the Seal team (if permitted by the Navy) but until then Hersh (and I'm a fan) nor anyone else can say for certain what really happened that night.

Interviews of people outside the compound have been reported, and those reports verify that there was a helicopter raid with much shooting. Who knows if there was return fire from Bin Ladin's camp.

And we kind of have to know that the Seals, on extremely high alert inside the compound, were not taking any chances as they searched the place. Not unlike police swat teams who have to breach a building to defuse a hostage situation. Somebody was going to get hurt.

I say thank God it wasn't the Seals.

[solarhydrocan]

187. People outside the compound...

Very few have seen these interviews.

Jahangir Khan appears to be very credible

What proof has been offered? Any pictures from the boat he was dumped off? Anything at all besides this:

[pnwmom]

103. The story is not "obviously bogus." Bin Laden's body wouldn't have proved anything.

They dumped his body so his burial place couldn't turn into a shrine. Good for them.

[delta17]

207. Also, no country would accept his body.

They made the right decision.

[roguevalley]

147. given that Saddam was placed in a spider hole for American soldiers

to 'find', nothing surprises me. I like his ideas.

[spanone]

182. obviously bogus.... links please.

[geek tragedy]

188. You say based on nothing but feelings. nt

[Junkdrawer]

2. But we have proof: We buried him at sea.

Seymour Hersh is about to go under too. The bus.

[G_j]

5. Yep

he must have said something unpleasant.
I suppose we will see a number of threads
proclaiming him as the latest anti-Christ.

[go west young man]

49. He's obviously a Rand Paul/Putin supporter.....

and he hates black people and homosexuals. Must be.

[geek tragedy]

192. More like an Alex Jones type at this point in his career. nt

[Lasher]

10. He read it on the internet, so it must be true.

[warrior1]

13. et tu seymour

I call bullshit on mr. hersh.

[elehhhhna]

53. hersch shoudl back up his talk

which he doesn't seem to bother to do anymore.

[rso]

69. hersch

Agree 100 %. No evidence behind his claims, just his personal opinion.

[BeyondGeography]

22. He's making an ass of himself

Hersh returns to US president Barack Obama. He has said before that the confidence of the US press to challenge the US government collapsed post 9/11, but he is adamant that Obama is worse than Bush.

"Do you think Obama's been judged by any rational standards? Has Guantanamo closed? Is a war over? Is anyone paying any attention to Iraq? Is he seriously talking about going into Syria? We are not doing so well in the 80 wars we are in right now, what the hell does he want to go into another one for. What's going on [with journalists]?" he asks.

Then there's this gem:

He says in some ways President George Bush's administration was easier to write about. "The Bush era, I felt it was much easier to be critical than it is [of] Obama. Much more difficult in the Obama era," he said.

Oh, I know. It's harder to be critical of Obama because of the editors who refuse to go along with Seymour's bullshit take on things, not because, well, it's harder to be critical of Obama.

[Recursion]

26. Didn't he run with that story of "hundreds of US soldiers killed" in that airfield attack?

That was his Jason Leopold moment, at least for me

[LWolf]

31. Hersh is correct about journalism in the U.S.. nt

[randome]

35. No argument there.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[Shrike47]

36. I don't care much about how OBL was killed.

Dead is good. Mr. Hersch, who I read and respect, needs to focus on another subject.

[leftstreet]

80. Why would you suspect that?

Why would you assume people who are trying to find work, trying to avoid bouncing checks, attempting to keep a roof over their heads and food in their stomachs, or worried about buying their kids school clothes, would give a shit about UBL?

[leftstreet]

91. No, you said they were glad he's dead

That's not the same as 'nobody really cares'

[bobduca]

217. Good Americans are scared of official boogeymen, dontchaknow?

[Kaleva]

45. I don't care either.

If Seal Team 6 executed him, that's fine with me.

[Logical]

300. LOL, yes, lets be ok with executions for ones we deem really really bad. n-t

[Hydra]

40. Amusing responses in this thread

I can see rule of law is now a passe concept. We pretended to be better than this, once.

[Junkdrawer]

56. I'll say. Tremendous redirection. One Big Lie = Killed in Cold Blood????

Something tells me that is NOT what Hersh is saying.

[Hydra]

63. Hersh didn't say specifically what they lied about

We'll have to wait and see when the book comes out. Romulox was nice enough to link details from what the troops said further up, and it sounds like they could have captured him but were given kill orders.

Since that's not legal, yes there's a problem with it. Apparently nobody cares, since he was our Emmanuel Goldstein, complete with 2 minute hates.

[Romulox]

58. Indeed. Posters with a few dozen posts strutting about in a "Mission Accomplished" pose... nt

[EX500rider]

226. No, see as your post count increases so does your wisdom!! lol n/t

[Hydra]

72. Thanks for posting the info from the troops further up

I prefer to hear it from the people who were there.

[treestar]

164. Now you've resorted to ad hominem

We are to consider post count rather than substance of the post.

[themaguffin]

78. Your response is amusing

If one lets previous abuses (like how we got into Iraq etc etc) blur the fact that a without a doubt terrorist was killed legitimately then nothing will ever be done legitimately in that one's mind.

If others (innocent) are killed to get him, there could be legitimate discussion on how he was killed.

Osama wasn't a head of state or any other position of state. He was a terrorist. He was killed in an isolated situation. If some bizarre cruel acts had happened, a lot of people would question why the need, but they went in a mission to kill a terrorist who would kill again.

[Hydra]

118. They never bothered to bring a legal case against him

And there is some evidence that he could have been captured and brought to trial.

And regarding how it's an isolated incident:

How does Team Obama justify killing him?

The answer Gibbs gave is chilling:

ADAMSON: ...It's an American citizen that is being targeted without due process, without trial. And, he's underage. He's a minor.

GIBBS: I would suggest that you should have a far more responsible father if they are truly concerned about the well being of their children. I don't think becoming an al Qaeda jihadist terrorist is the best way to go about doing your business.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/10/how-team-obama-justifies-the-killing-of-a-16-year-old-american/264028/

We're getting further and further outside of any kind of law or even sanity, and people here are cheering it on.

Either you're a legal nation, or you're not. Which do you support?

[themaguffin]

125. This is a case where military action was needed, not a trial, for reasons I already stated

[Hydra]

130. *lol*

Ok, so we say he's a terrorist and must be killed. Legal requirements are null at that point.

That makes indefinite detention without due process cool too, right?

[themaguffin]

141. due process for whom? LOL indeed.

[Doc Holliday]

114. Exaggerate much?

It is said that for every rule there are exceptions. This would appear to be just that.

The rule of law is intended to protect the innocent. Does bin Laden fit that description?

I, as a generally law-abiding, upstanding American, care not a whit whether all the i-s are dotted and the t-s are crossed when it comes to bin Laden. A long list of shameful shit has been done militarily in the name of We The People over the years, but I don't think this makes the list.

[Romulox]

119. The rule of law applies to the innocent and the guilty equally.

In the first place, it's how you determine "guilt" in the first place.

[Hydra]

133. Looks like I got my answer

Rule of law is passe. Whatever the President(King) says is cool now. As long as he's in the party you voted for, of course.

[treestar]

167. In a civil society

Not in the middle of a war, battlefield, or for admitted terrorists who are as likely to shoot back or even kill themselves to make their point. The SEALs went into a dangerous situation. They were more than justified in thinking UBL would not surrender for a trial.

[EX500rider]

233. Except on a raid into a enemy compound...

....it's not about "innocent/guilty" but "us/them" and military age males without their hands up can be shot.

[Hydra]

126. Thanks for proving my point

Laws are not optional "crossing the t's." You do them every single time. You do them when it's easy, or when it's hard.

[EX500rider]

234. What law do you think protects OBL while in Pakistan?

US? Pakistan?

How about the rules of war which allow the killing of the enemy who don't have their hands up?

[Hydra]

265. So if Putin declares you an enemy of his state

And has his version of Seal Team 6 shoot you and your family up, that's all fine and dandy?

[EX500rider]

268. Well if i mastermind 4,000 dead Russian civilians...

......then i would be a "enemy of the state" wouldn't I? Did we shoot up OBL's family or were in fact the women alive after the raid?

[geek tragedy]

189. No, it's just funny how people whine about it

not being followed when they have no evidence it wasn't.

Bin laden is dead, as he should be, as he should have been in Tora Bora.

[noiretextatique]

225. as long as a D does it, it is fine

our team can do no wrong. I keep reading complete Bs here about the far left and far right being the same. The truth is the vast mushy middle is problem. They approv e of whatever their team does, no matter how horrible.

[Politicub]

50. I didn't realize Hersh was with the seal team

That man gets around.

Otherwise, how would he know it's "one big lie," to use his words?

[BeyondGeography]

62. He was also there when we decided to invade Iran

five separate times in the last decade.

[Ilsa]

54. I'm grateful we didn't take the bastard prisoner and

put more people at risk. Everyone I know is glad he's burning in hell, or at least ceases to exist. At best, he's dung in the maggot up the ass of a dead stinkbug.

[Botany]

70. It was a kill mission from the start

I didn't want his (OBL's) lard ass back here in the U.S. for a trial ..... that would have been
a nightmare.

The man needed to die and yet Rummy let him walk from Toro Boro because w/ bin
Laden dead it would have been harder to go to war in Iraq.

[Ilsa]

97. ITA on all comments.

It scares me to consider how corrupt bushco was in all of this.

It scares me to think of how we could effectively provide security for the parties in a trial. My guess is that we wouldn't be able to rule out OBL getting kidnapped and tortured by his victims, as well as terrorists intervention to try and save him.

I think he got off easy with a brain bullet, but I'm glad he's dead.

[madrchsod]

111. that pretty much sums up what happened in two sentences.....

[Cryptoad]

59. Meanwhile back on the Farm,,,

the GOP is destroying our country, one day at a time!

[G_j]

60. completely aside from anything Hersh has said,

if one is arguing that Pentagon/military policy is to tell the truth, they are utterly clueless!

[99Forever]

81. He's dead.

That's a good thing, regardless of how he got that way. The world is a better place because he is no longer in it.

If Seymour Hersh disagrees, too bad. He can go have intercourse with himself.

[rhett o rick]

107. I am glad the CT posse hasnt decided to try to censor this OP.

I think they are too sensitive as it is. Some want badly to put issues to rest because it's too much work to think otherwise. Most likely OBL is dead, but I hope some might be able to understand a great interest our government would have in keeping him alive and faking his death. There, I've gone and done it. I understand how hard that would be to pull off. I am just sayin that I bet there was a lot of thought put in to it.

Crazy CT is bad, but not all speculation is bad.

[tritsofme]

197. I'm a proponent of giving sunlight to CT nuts like this.

Nothing is more embarrassing to their cause than having other people read this sort of garbage.

[rhett o rick]

203. I think people that are "politically liberal" welcome all points of view. They feel they

are smart enough to tell the garbage from the possible without having someone else censoring points of view. All too often those that are big on censoring are doing such to push an agenda.

[stonecutter357]

122. bull chit!

[Vox Moi]

127. An opportunity lost

Bin Laden: unarmed, old, alone in the room.
The single most important intelligence resource on terrorism in the world ...
A chance to bring the man to trial and show the world what a despicable miscreant he truly is ...
A chance to show the world that we stand for a rule of law and are not afraid to bringing truth to light ...

And we kill him and dump his body in the ocean like some mafia hit.

... leaving those with doubts still in doubt
... leaving conspiracy buss with plenty to chew on

Even Saddam got a trial. Even top Nazis.

Let me also say this:
In a war, intelligence is of great value and many lives are lost in order get it ... spies, patrols who are ordered to bring back prisoners, recon missions... the cold calculus of war is this: you take risks and accept casualties to get intelligence because it can help you win the war.

[whatchamacallit]

176. Yes, a monumental opportunity

were he not a smoking gun. And like most incriminating evidence, he now resides at the bottom of the drink.

[cherokeeprogressive]

181. I'm guessing you don't know whether he was unarmed or alone unless you were there.

[Vox Moi]

209. The account I read says he was unarmed but that isn't the point

Capturing Bin Landen would have done a lot to answer questions about:
911, the 'relationship' between Bin Laden and Iraq, the relationship between Bin Laden and the US in the days during the Russian occupation of Afghanistan and afterwards, not to mention a treasure-trove of information about terrorist organizations, communications, recruitment and so on.
If this was a war on Bin Laden then killing him would have ended the war. This was the war on terrorism and we killed off a valuable asset in the prosecution of that war.
Consider also:
In killing Bin Laden we missed an golden opportunity to kill the legend of Bin Laden, which is still useful to terrorists today.

Why spend all that time interrogating and torturing the underlings and then throw away an opportunity to do so with the main man?

Can you give us your argument as to why killing Bin Laden was better than capturing him?

[cherokeeprogressive]

278. "The account I read..."

I'll stop there.

[go west young man]

292. Well put post.

Lots of people have opinions and emotions regarding Bin laden but your post sums up very nicely, in proper military principles, why it would of been better to take him alive. All the reasons you post make sense from a military perspective. Killing him should of been a last resort.

[EX500rider]

229. Right...

....'cause once we got him he was going to sing like a canary don't ya know......lol

All the actionable intelligence recovered from the raid would be on the laptops and cd/dvd's and printouts. OBL wasn't going to tell us jack.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

135. I'm still running into Morans on YouTube claiming Iraq had WMDs.

[gopiscrap]

180. Welcome to DU!!!

[HoosierCowboy]

143. Was a star put on the wall when OBL got stiffed?

The Company lost one of its best assets that day. If you don't know what wall it was or what company it was, then there's no hope for you at all.
There's no way they could have brought back this guy and have him turned loose in the lamestream media.
On the other hand, he may just be in the witness protection program, a little plastic surgery and a hair transplant, and we can picture him running a Quikee Mart in Dearborn, Michigan, handing out slurpees to the kiddies.
What ever the official story is, we can be sure that it was carefully engineered to close the chapter one of the Companys biggest misadventures.

[G_j]

158. "official story"

what are the odds that any official story
is accurate? ...very slim to zero

[TheKentuckian]

174. Tend to agree.

[Hydra]

178. Not a misadventure

But it certainly is effective closure for a thorny issue they couldn't quite bury.

[wildbilln864]

296. + 1! welcome to the DU! n/t

[whatchamacallit]

159. OBL's last words

"Hey guys, the State Department didn't mention you were stopping by. Can I get you something to dri..."

Of course it was a lie. The whole enchilada has been a lie since decision 2000.

[Hydra]

177. Yup

The problem is Bush is not officially still in office. If he was and this had happened, all of us would have been like "Duh, of course they're lying!"

Since our team is in office, it makes things "complicated"

Funny how so many people here called on the Rep voters at the time to see the truth and call it out...who are now worshiping Bushco lies because our team supports it now.

[geek tragedy]

191. No, we just don't get our news from Alex

Jones and other nutjob conspiracy loons.

[whatchamacallit]

198. It's interesting you assume all doubts about the official story originated

with the likes of Alex Jones. Many have had doubts since day one, based on their own observations and critical thinking. This really says more about your dependence on sources than ours.

[geek tragedy]

201. Sure, you're claiming there's a great big conspiracy surrounding bin Laden's death

based exclusively on the word of a guy who hasn't been right about anything since 2004.

There's a reasons why Truthers and Birthers get treated as two halves of the same coin,

[whatchamacallit]

202. What?

I'm basing my opinions on who? If your referring to Alex jones, you didn't bother to read my post. I've never listened to Alex Jones and I never read infowars or any other suspect, over the top, too batshit on purpose, sites. I know it makes it easier for you to smear people with whom you disagree if you can tie them to this crap, but it's bullshit.

[whatchamacallit]

206. Oh, oops, well then

Carry on.

[geek tragedy]

218. Okay, what impeccable source provides your view that Hillary Clinton's State Department

viewed bin Laden as an asset?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3743025

[Hydra]

210. *lol*

You sure showed me!

Except for the fact that we have evidence that Bush knew about the 9/11 attack beforehand and quashed it. Remember this little gem:

"I don't think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center, take another one and slam it into the Pentagon; that they would try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile. All of this reporting about hijacking was about traditional hijacking."

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/06/20/1101687/-New-9-11-Documents-Expose-the-Nobody-Could-Have-Predicted-President

At one point, it was taken as a common sense point that anything Bushco said(unless by accident) was a lie. Now we believe all of it wholecloth because this Admin decided to adopt the same policies?

Man, that's some awesome doublethink there.

[geek tragedy]

219. So, you think Obama's in on the cover up of the fact that the US government intentionally

let the 911 attack happen?

[Hydra]

223. What cover up?

We know it happened. We also know Bushco ordered people tortured and killed. And stole the election. Twice.

Why are these high crimes being ignored?

[geek tragedy]

230. the subject is 9/11 . n t

[Hydra]

239. Yes, and this happened:

The book's opening anecdote tells of an unnamed CIA briefer who flew to Bush's Texas ranch during the scary summer of 2001, amid a flurry of reports of a pending al-Qaeda attack, to call the president's attention personally to the now-famous Aug. 6, 2001, memo titled "Bin Ladin Determined to Strike in US." Bush reportedly heard the briefer out and replied: "All right. You've covered your ass, now."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/19/AR2006061901211.html

along with this:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/10/august6.memo/

which was the subject of ass covering.

This is not covered up, it's in broad daylight and not being prosecuted for.

[geek tragedy]

243. That certainly reveals gross incompetence.

But we knew that.

[geek tragedy]

190. Did he have Obama's long form too?

Since you're pushing insane conspiracy theories as found on infowars etc?

Just to recap--you claimed that the State Department under Hillary Clinton and President Obama were utilizing him as an asset. That's crazier than the Birther shit.

[Enthusiast]

294. "The whole enchilada has been a lie since decision 2000."

We have witnessed some very odd shit going down in this nation since the 2000 faked election results. One does not steal an election with good intentions in mind.

[stevenleser]

183. It would help to know in what way it's a lie according to him.

97% of why I would care has to do with whether bin Laden is in fact dead. If Hersh believes and has evidence otherwise, that would be a big deal.

If it has to do with other aspects of how it was done, or whether the order was given to potentially bring him back alive or whether it was a straight kill mission from the get go, all of that info and questioning is already out there. We've talked and debated it several times on DU IIRC.

I don't think those details have as much interest in the public as the central question of whether or not he is still alive.

[DevonRex]

248. He says "not one word is true." nt

[bluestate10]

262. And with that statement, Seymour is just another person expressing an opinion. nt

[gopiscrap]

185. Interesting

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

186. And Hersh's evidence is?

[treestar]

196. Yes, I thought investigative journalists, you know, investigated

rather than just spouting off.

[stevenleser]

213. Supposedly 'it' is in his book, so in a way, I understand why he doesnt want to give it away before

we buy the book.

But I can tell you this, if reports of the book come out and it is anything other than "OBL is still Alive: Here's proof", many folks wont be the slightest bit interested. I don't care if the order was to shoot him on sight, and neither do most of the people around the world. I don't care if the operation went down slightly different than what was described.

The mastermind of an international terrorist organization that killed lots of people on several continents got what he deserved.

[kelliekat44]

245. Just trying to gin up interest in his book. That is all. nt

[randome]

204. I wouldn't have thought an article like this would generate so much interest.

DU must be desperate for an issue around which to debate. It's been too quiet lately.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[Hydra]

211. Mostly due to knee jerk

I actually read the article, which it seems more than a few didn't and simply didn't like what they anticipated it would say.

We'll have to see what's in Hersh's book to say more about the specifics of the lie.

[stevenleser]

212. If the book says anything other than OBL is still alive: here's proof, the article is hype.

And particularly hyperbolic hype at that.

[Hydra]

214. I saw your post on that

And frankly, I was shocked for a minute. I didn't think the Obama Admin would dare do something that blatant...but you got me thinking.

For my part, I think the lie is in both how it happened and was later presented, and in the fact that I believe we've always known where he was and waited for a PR advantageous time to do it. Also, I've said in this thread multiple times that we should have had a trial, but it probably would have led to charges against Bushco, and President Obama is dead set against charging those traitors.

[treestar]

253. Exactly. Goodness this is on the same level as those

CTers who say 911 never happened.

[2banon]

284. Wow! i've never heard anyone claim that 9/11 never happened. Not ever..

who says that???

[treestar]

290. go look up the no planes theory

it is lunacy in action

[EX500rider]

237. "I wouldn't have thought an article like this would generate so much interest."

.....Well St Hugo's dead and I guess nobodies been to Olive Garden with a pit bull while drinking a oversized GMO soda and open carrying?

[geek tragedy]

247. Well, the "Obama lied about killing bin Laden"

is a twofer--combines conspiracy theory with the Obama= lying war criminal memes.

It's a perennial favorite--kind of a leftwing version of Benghazi. They go back to it whenever they run out of current stuff to complain about.

[bluestate10]

263. Wow, you are lucky that your post didn't get hidden. Not that I don't agree with your point,

it is just that there is a clique on DU that goes after anyone that compares the far Left to the right.

[geek tragedy]

264. Meh. If the tinfoil beanie fits . . . nt

[2banon]

285. omg I thought I signed up to be in the company of Leftists!

Leftists not welcomed here? oky doky got it.

[geek tragedy]

286. Most leftists are quite sane and reject such tinfoil

nuttiness.

[2banon]

288. tinfoil nuttiness?

Seymour Hersh?

[geek tragedy]

289. .

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/20/AR2011012006090.html

[2banon]

299. That isn't Evidence of Tin Hat CT

Hersh is simply summarizing what was years ago revealed/reported on by military veterans.

For the Military Commanders/Officers these wars were very much a Christian Crusade, and this was given a lot of attention during the BushCo regime's illegal invasion of Iraq and war in Afghanistan.

Frankly, I'm really surprised that anyone here on DU would provide a link of McChrystal's denials, as if his denials were in the least bit credible.

Seriously!

I recall several reportings from various veterans in the earlier years. Most notably former Air Force Officer Michael Weinstein.

Here's an excerpt of just one of his several articles on the subject :


The United States Military ... a Crusader Force?

Case in point: the recent decision to rename Beaufort, South Carolina-based Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 122 (VMFA-122) the "Crusaders" and adopt the red cross of the crusading medieval Knights Templar.

This alarming decision to rechristen the jet fighter squadron as "Crusaders" threatens to reignite the explosive tension and anti-American rage that exists across the Muslim world. "Crusader" is an epithet that is routinely used to describe US military personnel throughout the Arab and Islamic world. A phrase which literally means "taking up the cross," Crusader recalls a history of colonization and campaigns of conquest and plunder spearheaded by European Christian military orders. Spanning three centuries and starting in the year 1096, the crusades viciously claimed the lives of millions of inhabitants of the Middle East. While motivated by the secular incentives of lucre and mammon, the Crusades serve as a hideous testament to the noxious danger embodied by the foreboding alloy of weaponized theology.

Among other things he wrote : With God on Our Side: One Man's War Against an Evangelical Coup in America's Military

There were other reportings on this bit of history and given attention here on DU during those years... Hersh by no means has revealed anything new.

Just isn't given the attention or notice in our media, like so much else.

Surprise, surprise..

[Cerridwen]

267. Got your flamey. All better now?

You posted the OP and never returned.

Why?

Also, why didn't you go to the source of the article you posted? Or did you? If you did, why post this title versus the other?

Before anyone gives me shit, these are the same types of questions I want to see the so called "fourth estate" ask each and every person they interview. Why that source rather than another. Why that interpretation rather than another?

Since those calling themselves "journalists" aren't asking those questions, I guess it's up to me. It's up to you, too if you care about finding out what's really going on rather than what we're told is going on; using cherry picking, selective quoting, and selective facts.

[zappaman]

273. Why did the seal team have guns when they went into OBL's compound, eh?

Why weren't they carrying flowers?

[name not needed]

279. For all we know OBL had a pollen allergy.

You fucking monster.

[Wilms]

280. After the way our troops were greeted in Baghdad?

[Hobo]

287. Hard to fucking believe

that anyone is shedding a tear or wasting a synapse on OBL.........

ODS is full bloom in this thread.

Hobo

[nolabels]

301. To get me to believe Osama Bin Laden was that great boogyman at anyrate..........

You would first need me to believe in the false flag that was 9/11.


And hello to Agent Mike, it's nice to see you out on this fine Sunday