"The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants" - Albert Camus

Monday, August 1, 2011

Getting Bin Laden (and Lying About the Details)

If you are interested in reading about the operation to capture (hah!) or kill Bin Laden, I strongly suggest you read the New Yorker article by Nicholas Schmidle.  It not only sheds light on the details of the operation, but also reaffirms what we already know: this is an Administration of liars (and bad ones at that).

Any thinking person would have known and jumped on the conclusion that, from the very beginning, it was decided not to take Bin Laden alive if and when he was found.  Just think about it: capturing the symbolic head of anti-west terrorism and the can of worms that would open for any country holding him (not to mention trying and executing him).  That would have been akin to watching a car crash in extreme slow motion - agonizing and a foreign relations disaster for an administration which has gone out of its way to try to dismiss military tribunals for captured terrorists.

The bulk of the evidence can be found in the following passages from the article:

If all went according to plan, the SEALs would drop from the helicopters into the compound, overpower bin Laden’s guards, shoot and kill him at close range, and then take the corpse back to Afghanistan.
A second SEAL stepped into the room and trained the infrared laser of his M4 on bin Laden’s chest. The Al Qaeda chief, who was wearing a tan shalwar kameez and a prayer cap on his head, froze; he was unarmed. “There was never any question of detaining or capturing him—it wasn’t a split-second decision. No one wanted detainees,” the special-operations officer told me. (The Administration maintains that had bin Laden immediately surrendered he could have been taken alive.) Nine years, seven months, and twenty days after September 11th, an American was a trigger pull from ending bin Laden’s life. The first round, a 5.56-mm. bullet, struck bin Laden in the chest. As he fell backward, the SEAL fired a second round into his head, just above his left eye.
 As an expected side note, the New Yorker being a progressive publication, the author also adds:

None of them had any previous knowledge of the house’s floor plan, and they were further jostled by the awareness that they were possibly minutes away from ending the costliest manhunt in American history; as a result, some of their recollections—on which this account is based—may be imprecise and, thus, subject to dispute.

Undoubtedly a pathetic little attempt to leave the door ajar for Obama etal. to claim they were telling the truth when they claimed capturing Bin Laden was an option. 

Capturing Bin Laden would have nothing but downsides for the Administration as their faulty vision is one of establishing harmony with the Muslim world - not creating more tensions.  Secondly, believing that SEALs memory of this operation would be cloudy is downright preposterous.  This would require complete suspension of intellect as anyone who knows anything about SEALs knows that these are highly trained, highly intelligent special ops personnel who do not crack under pressure - let alone forget the details of such a memorable operation. 

Once again, this is another indication of the shameless lies that this group will spread for perceived political benefit. 

1 comment:

Tenth Generation Patriot said...

Excellent post, however, Obama is dumb enough and naive enough to say "Catch him if you can."

Obama is a first rate knucklehead when it comes to making decisions. He cannot decide on anything without advisors and studies, and when he does open his mouth without coaching, he invariably screws up. He probably thought he could have bin Laden over for a beer summit.