Patterico's Pontifications

5/2/2011

Osama News Roundup (Video Goodness Added!) (And Confirmed: bin Laden Used a Woman as a Human Shield) (And We Have Our First Death Denier!)

Filed under: General — Aaron Worthing @ 10:56 am

[Guest post by Aaron Worthing; if you have tips, please send them here.  Or by Twitter @AaronWorthing.]

Update: Most updates will be at the end. So scroll down. Including video goodness!

Update (III): This is too awesome to put below the fold. Via the AFP, we get confirmation of a rumor I have heard all day:

Al-Qaeda mastermind Osama bin Laden used one of his wives as a human shield in an apparent attempt to try to save his own life during a raid by US covert forces, a top US official said Monday.
“There was family at that compound, and there was a female who was, in fact, in the line of fire that reportedly was used as a shield to shield bin Laden from the incoming fire,” counter-terrorism official John Brennan said.

And if all that Limbaugh unity isn’t enough I am going to say something truly unprecedented: I agree with Kman. He writes in the comments:

I hope the Navy SEALS had video cams attached to the combat helmets, because the picture I want to see — or rather, the picture the Islamofascists need to see — is the one of bin Laden being a coward and using a woman as a human shield.

Wholly agree. It would only be better as psy-ops if he was wearing a dress.

Update (X): This update is too much fun to put below the fold. We have our first bin Laden Death Denier! She is a lady who once had absolute moral authority, until she was no longer useful politically. Yes, Cindy Sheehan:

I am sorry, but if you believe the newest death of OBL, you’re stupid. Just think to yourself–they paraded Saddam’s dead sons around to prove they were dead–why do you suppose they hastily buried this version of OBL at sea? This lying, murderous Empire can only exist with your brainwashed consent–just put your flags away and THINK!

Bright move on the burial, there, Obama.

Anyway, the original post follows. And most updates will be below the fold, so keep checking. I don’t plan to start a new post on this for a bit.

——————————-

There is no overarching point to this post, just a bunch of news about the killing and some minor “pop off” commentary.  To be blunt these items are going to be kind of random, so expect a little whiplash jumping from topic to topic.

First, you knew this was coming right?  The inevitable Taiwanese Animation of the Death of Osama.  And damn if it isn’t the best one ever!

Second, I didn’t get to see it last night but here is Obama’s announcement:

Having watched it, I think it was actually a pretty good speech.  I think he took some credit, as expected, but wasn’t obnoxious about it.  And he deserves credit.  He could have wimped out, or badly managed it in some way, so he is right today to say that he deserves credit.  I think the maximally classy thing to do would have been to credit Bush for this, but if he said anything to that effect, I missed it.  Still I give it a positive mark.  I would grade it at an A.

By the way, what is with his odd body language?  Literally nothing but his head moves the whole time.

I feel absolute, undiluted joy by all of this.  And yes, as our brains engage more we will have criticism.  But really, seriously, the news has made my week.

And even Rush Limbaugh felt constrained to start off his broadcast by saying, “we need to open the program today by congratulating President Obama.”  You can watch that here:

As Mediaite notes:

You know how people always talk about getting back to the way we were on September 12th? It may have just happened.

One criticism by Patrick is that we chose to bury him at sea right away, according to Islamic rules, something I fully concur with (for another view, see here).  How many people think Elvis is alive, and working on a secret new album with Tupac?  And besides the psychic benefit for us in knowing that the bastard is dead, there is the real-world benefit when it comes to recruiting.  Meanwhile the White House is so clueless on this issue they are debating whether to even release photographs, thinking somehow that lab reports claiming a DNA match would be enough.  It is for me, but what about for the people still convinced that Oswald was a patsy or that the Moon landing was fake?  Still, as news dribbles in, we learn that the decision to dispose of the body quickly was driven by Islam:

After bin Laden was killed in a raid by U.S. forces in Pakistan, senior administration officials said the body would be handled according to Islamic practice and tradition. That practice calls for the body to be buried within 24 hours, the official said. Finding a country willing to accept the remains of the world’s most wanted terrorist would have been difficult, the official said. So the U.S. decided to bury him at sea.

There are also reports that the U.S. did not want him buried on land so as to prevent the grave from becoming a shrine.

The official, who spoke Monday on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive national security matters, did not immediately say where that occurred.

Groan.  But the irony is that they may not have understood what Islam requires as well as they think they did.  Via American Thinker, we get this from a post at Jihad Watch:

Bin Laden: Al Azhar, Sea Burial Is A Sin

The body of Osama bin Laden must be buried in the ground, and throwing it into the sea would be a ‘sin’, said Mahmoud Ashour of the Al Azhar Academy of Islamic Research, the most prestigious Sunni educational institute, while speaking to ANSA.

The Al Azhar official rejected the idea of sea burial of the Al Qaida leader for “trivial motives”, explaining that even when someone drowns, the body must be searched for in order to be able to “bury it in the ground”. “They should bury it in the ground without putting anything on the grave,” explained Ashour, responding to a question about whether Osama bin Laden’s burial could become a sort of pilgrimage site. (ANSAmed).

Update: See also this story on the “Islamicness” of burial at sea.

This is verified to a certain extent in this roundup of Middle Eastern Reactions over at Memri, which says:

Muslim clerics said that the burial of bin Laden at sea that was a violation of Islamic law, which permits such burial only if the death took place at sea.

By the way, the title of the post is “Bin Laden Assassination – Hamas Condemns It, PA Welcomes It, Islamists Expect Revenge, Iran Doubts Whether He Was Assassinated At All.”  But of course Iran denies it.  It’s what they do.  Certainly the same cabal that faked the holocaust could easily fake bin Laden’s death, right?  (Note: I am being sarcastic.)

Also Yahoo wraps up more reactions here, and we hear more from Hamas here.   As a rule of thumb if Hamas is angry, I am happy.  And there is this story about Pakistan:

That bin Laden, mastermind of the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United States, was not hiding in mountains along the border but in relative comfort in a town hosting the main military academy and home to scores of retired and serving officers will bolster those who have long argued that Pakistan has been playing a duplicitous hand.

Just 10 days ago, Pakistan’s army chief addressed cadets at that very academy, saying the country’s military had broken the back of militants linked to al Qaeda and the Taliban.

Indeed neighbors are professing shock to discover that bin Laden lived here.  Um, right.

And meanwhile at Politico, which is not getting a link from me, we get this reaction, too:

“America coming to our territory and taking action is a violation of our sovereignty,” Musharraf told CNN-IBN. “Handling and execution of the operation [by US forces] is not correct. The Pakistani government should have been kept in the loop.”

We said after 9-11 that we would make no distinction between the people who committed the attacks on 9-11 and the countries who harbor such terrorists.  Which means, Pakistan, you are damn lucky we didn’t invade your whole country over this.  Harboring a man who murdered so many Americans was a violation of our sovereignty.

Also in another story from Politico, we get this reaction from Guiliani:

“I feel a great deal of satisfaction that justice has been done, and I admire the courage of the president to make a decision like this because if something had gone wrong everyone would be blaming him,” Giuliani told POLITICO Monday morning in his first comments since the capture. “And I admire the courage and professionalism of our military intelligence officials who carried this out and this is a great victory against terror. Nobody can minimize it. He was a symbol more than anything else right now but … symbols are really important.”

Calling it a “significant step,” he added: “I feel satisfaction and some emotional relief, but I don’t feel great elation. I watch a lot of the celebrating and it makes me feel a little strange, I don’t know. Nothing erases the loss of all those lives. … so I feel satisfaction and I feel the right thing has been done. and I guess it will good thing ultimately but I don’t feel like celebrating [as if it's] the end of World War II, because the war is still going on.”

And I know what you are thinking: but what do celebrities think about all this?  Well, here’s the answer, as well as the answer to the question: who is smarter, Katy Perry or Kim Kardashian?  (I’ll give you a hint: it’s the one mainly famous for having a big butt and a sex tape—with apologies to The Soup.)

On the other hand, we are reminded that wikileaks documents assert that we would see a nuclear 9-11 if we killed bin laden, supposedly.

And meanwhile Bush did get credit locally:

Flag-waving supporters left flowers and patriotic red, white and blue balloons outside the Dallas home of former President George W. Bush Monday in the hours that followed the U.S.-led mission that killed Osama bin Laden.

“Thank you President Bush,” said a sign left on the gate outside the street leading to the secluded Bush residence.

About a dozen people gathered near his security-tight residence until a thunderstorm rolled into the area early Monday.

Good for them.

And Hot Air has lots of video reactions last night, such as in D.C.

Meanwhile, do you think this video is fake?  Hmm, I don’t know.

This video, meanwhile, is much less likely to be fake, as ABC news goes inside bin Laden’s compound:

And you can read about it, here.

At the same time, the AP has this account of the raid and what led up to it.  Here’s some snippets and commentary:

Intelligence officials discovered the compound in August while monitoring an al-Qaida courier. The CIA had been hunting that courier for years, ever since detainees told interrogators that the courier was so trusted by bin Laden that he might very well be living with the al-Qaida leader.

Nestled in an affluent neighborhood, the compound was surrounded by walls as high as 18 feet, topped with barbed wire. Two security gates guarded the only way in. A third-floor terrace was shielded by a seven-foot privacy wall. No phone lines or Internet cables ran to the property. The residents burned their garbage rather than put it out for collection. Intelligence officials believed the million-dollar compound was built five years ago to protect a major terrorist figure. The question was, who?

By the way, how did we learn about that courier?  Why from KSM:

Current and former U.S. officials say that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, provided the nom de guerre of one of bin Laden’s most trusted aides. The CIA got similar information from Mohammed’s successor, Abu Faraj al-Libi. Both were subjected to harsh interrogation tactics inside CIA prisons in Poland and Romania.

So it is accurate to say that but for waterboarding, we might not have gotten bin Laden.  Heh.

And this is all very interesting, but why are we being told this?  Should we really be telling the bad guys how to improve their game?

On April 29, Obama approved an operation to kill bin Laden. It was a mission that required surgical accuracy, even more precision than could be delivered by the government’s sophisticated Predator drones. To execute it, Obama tapped a small contingent of the Navy’s elite SEAL Team Six and put them under the command of CIA Director Leon Panetta, whose analysts monitored the compound from afar.

You catch that?  Not capture him, but to kill him, as verified in this Reuters story.  Not to be urinating on the parade float, here, but isn’t that a mistake.  Isn’t the better course of action to capture him if you can, and then squeeze him for all the information you can.

And by the way, isn’t it interesting that Obama himself decided that it was better to avoid taking him alive?  Of course not, because then according to Obama’s principles, he’d have to try him and indeed do so on American soil.  Killing him avoids that ugly mess.  He seems to lack the courage of his convictions on that count and because of that, we lost a potentially valuable source of intel.

I also found this detail to be interesting, from Kurtz:

Officials said three other men were killed in the raid—one who is believed to be bin Laden’s adult son, and two couriers. One woman was killed when she was used as a shield by one of the combatants, they said. The U.S. team lost a helicopter due to mechanical failure.

I have heard rumors—and that is all the credit I will give it right now—as rumors—that bin Laden himself was using that woman as a human shield.

Going back to reactions, we have Michael Moore saying numerous douchy things.  Drudge reports that he said bin Laden “won,” but his site is down with traffic overload, and the cache doesn’t reveal anything that bad, but still pretty bad.

Meanwhile a Washington Post writer considers all this joy at Osama’s demise unseemly.  And Salon publishes this tripe:

This is bin Laden’s lamentable victory — he has changed America’s psyche from one that saw violence as a regrettable-if-sometimes-necessary act into one that finds orgasmic euphoria in news of bloodshed. In other words, he’s helped drag us down into his sick nihilism by making us like too many other bellicose societies in history — the ones that aggressively cheer on killing, as long as it is the Bad Guy that is being killed.

Finally this article goes over what we know and don’t know about the team that did it.

Update: The Blaze has the actual powerpoint presentation for the raid. Cool beans. Go check it out.

Update (II): Via the Blaze we get we get video from the Naval Academy when they hear the news.

Ah crap, the Marines will never hear the end of that. And here is reaction at West Point, including cheerful pandemonium:

USA! USA! USA!

And a bad but moving rendition of the national anthem:

I think I would only be more moved if it was Lee Greenwood’s song God Bless the U.S.A.:

Hey, and if you are feeling moved to buy a copy of that song, try using the Amazon widget on the side. It puts a little money in Patrick’s pocket to keep this site running and there’s no extra cost to you.

Update (IV): Here’s Glenn Beck reacting, including being incredulous about the whole burial at sea:

And here is John Brennan arguing why we did have a burial at sea:

I have no problem with eventually disposing of the body, but it should have been after there was plenty of verification.

Meanwhile, one of bin Laden’s sons alleges that things will get worse on the terrorism front on the theory that dear old Dad was the merciful one.

Also there is this report (via Gateway Pundit) indicating that ordinary Pakistanis are stunned and even angry about this turn of events:

From some quarters, there is anger at the United States conducting a mission inside Pakistan.

Um, shouldn’t you guys be mad at bin Laden violating your sovereignty? Or is it the case that he was welcome there?

On the other hand, this seems like a more reasonable view:

From some, there is concern that Pakistan will be attacked in response for the death of bin Laden.

Tasneem Nooran is a former Pakistani secretary for the interior. He says he thinks the terrorist networks very well may strike back at Pakistan.

“The extremist group in Pakistan will hold the government responsible… and will hold the state responsible. I think you will see more terrorism here in retaliation,” Nooran said.

Meanwhile Frum makes the illogical argument that this should end the birther movement. As a non-birther who considers it a distraction, I sympathize with the goal, but what on Earth do they have to do with each other? Are we under the impression that only a naturally born citizen could have ordered the hit?

Finally (for now) via Politico (still no linky, jerks), we get these quotes:

“At this moment when bin Laden has been brought to justice, we especially remember the sacrifice of the young Americans who’ve paid the ultimate price in defense of the nation, as well as the nearly 3000 Americans who lost their lives on 9/11,” Cheney said.
Cheney offered his appreciation to the Obama administration. “I also want to congratulate President Obama and the members of his national security team,” he said.

Rumsfeld, who served in the Bush administration from 2001 to 2006, also praised the Obama administration, but not before celebrating his own. “All of this was made possible by the relentless, sustained pressure on al Qaeda that the Bush administration initiated after 9/11 and that the Obama administration has wisely chosen to continue,” he said.
The former defense secretary also noted that interrogations of suspected terrorist at Guantanamo Bay — something he supported — “may have played an essential role in this success.”

Update (V): The Onion presents “Bin Laden: Death of a [censored].”

Update (VI): Meet the man who live-tweeted the raid.

Update (VII): Now they are claiming they wanted to take bin Laden alive? Color me skeptical.

Update (IX): The Muslim brotherhood was caught saying one thing in English and a different thing in Arabic. A typical story, bluntly, as our media is too stupid to listen to what they say in Arabic.

Update (XI): Flashback on what Obama said about how he would take down bin Laden. It is interesting in retrospect.

[Posted and authored by Aaron Worthing.]

268 Comments

  1. btw, if any of you see more stories, send them to me as links, etc. Its clearly the story of the day.

    Comment by Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 5/2/2011 @ 11:09 am

  2. it was a very cowardly choice for bumble to insist on killing him I think

    he’s a terrified little girl when faced with the prospect of a narrative he can’t control

    but we could have learned so much

    Comment by happyfeet (a55ba0) — 5/2/2011 @ 11:17 am

  3. http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/2011/05/2011526196121642.html

    Comment by narciso (79ddc3) — 5/2/2011 @ 11:22 am

  4. The link for the Taiwanese animation is a raw video clip from the AP…

    Comment by skh.pcola (f4773e) — 5/2/2011 @ 11:22 am

  5. I said pretty much the same thing last night Aaron

    http://powip.com/2011/05/the-most-presidential-moment-of-mr-obamas-term/

    And have had some pretty surprising reactions from friendly quarters.

    We can all disagree with Mr. Obama’s politics, and still recognize that this event rises above it. And although many of our political opponents are shamelessly trying to make hay of it, there is much we can be thankful for.

    One thing is that since Obama green-lighted this, we can expect that barring any need to exploit sales/hits, entities such the NY times won’t feel the need to leak sensitive information like they would if a Rethug! were in the white house; in order to take the wind out of the sails, so to speak.

    Also, I firmly believe that the American people will see through any blatant attempts at spinning this as only being due to Obama’s greatness, or some such rubbish like that being peddled by Ms. Wasserman-Schultz starting within an hour of the President’s address.

    And a word of caution, and a historical analogy is in order. Just as Bin Laden was the architect of the 9/11 attacks, so too was Admiral Yamamoto the mastermind behind the sneak-attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941. While Yamamoto was killed in perhaps the longest-range fighter intercept ever, on April 14, 1943, the war with Japan continued until August 15, 1945-nearly 2 1/2 years later !

    So while we have accomplished an important goal, and eliminated an important member of the enemy’s chain of command, we can’t really declare victory until all our troops come home, for good, and we are no longer threatened by radicals and terrorists from abroad who hate us because of our way of life. I hope I haven’t harshed any mellows by tempering this moment with a bit of reality.

    I too am uncomfortable with the body being disposed of so quickly, and being buried at sea. But the unfortunate reality is that it’s a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” kind of thing. Well be criticized for burying him at sea, to be sure; but will think we avoided turning into a ghost-hero.

    But unfortunately, either way, his allies will try and portray him for all time as a heroic martyr who died at the hands of the great satan anyway.

    At least we can take comfort in his breathing privilages being revoked, and that none of our SEALs were killed doing so.

    My Regards.

    Comment by Bob Reed (5f2db5) — 5/2/2011 @ 11:23 am

  6. Never mind…it WAS the incorrect clip, until I clicked the “Read more” link. Belay that…

    Comment by skh.pcola (f4773e) — 5/2/2011 @ 11:23 am

  7. > The link for the Taiwanese animation is a raw video clip from the AP…

    anyone else having this problem, because i am not, and i am concerned about that, obviously.

    Comment by Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 5/2/2011 @ 11:25 am

  8. Good video from ABC. I guess it’s good, anyway. Nice to see that Osama Bin Laden’s home wasn’t too luxurious.

    I wish they had waited to announce the kill, if they got a bunch of computers, but I guess Obama gets some latitude there. Waiting, after confirmation, to announce what happened, opens a can of worms.

    I am not confident that we went in to kill, with no chance of capture, but let’s consider the fact the SEALs already had a really tough task to just get in and out of there alive. My guess is they offered surrender and there was little likelihood he’d accept, anyway.

    And frankly, I’m so glad we don’t have the moonbat spectacle of a trial for OBL.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/2/2011 @ 11:25 am

  9. By the way, it’s important to recall that Bush the elder had stratospheric approval ratings after evicting Saddam from Kuwait in Operation Desert Storm; and still lost the election less than 2 years later owing in part at least to an economic climate that was far better than today’s.

    So we’ve got that going for us…

    Comment by Bob Reed (5f2db5) — 5/2/2011 @ 11:27 am

  10. Bob Reed

    yeah, that’s just about the right tone, dude.

    Comment by Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 5/2/2011 @ 11:27 am

  11. I’m also fairly certain that the SEALs were attempting to capture him, but that their orders were in keeping with the archetypal, “wanted, dead or alive”.

    Osama essentially said, “you won’t take me alive copperz!”

    Comment by Bob Reed (5f2db5) — 5/2/2011 @ 11:29 am

  12. Crappyfeet needs to buy me a new irony meter I think.

    Comment by DohBiden (15aa57) — 5/2/2011 @ 11:31 am

  13. feel free to delete my accidental double post.

    Comment by DohBiden (15aa57) — 5/2/2011 @ 11:32 am

  14. Reed, the reporting is that capture was not in their orders.

    Yglesias at Think Progress gives us the expected theme that now the war on terror is over.

    Unbelievable the stupidity.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 5/2/2011 @ 11:33 am

  15. Mr. Reed it was reported that the SEALs were under strict orders to kill kill kill

    Comment by happyfeet (a55ba0) — 5/2/2011 @ 11:34 am

  16. Don’t get me wrong about this, I think we should be killing Muslims and fighting against Islam, left right and center,

    but crowing about some one’s death, especially Bin Landen’s is a waist of time.

    Comment by Jack (f9fe53) — 5/2/2011 @ 11:41 am

  17. Bloodthirsty warmongering racist wingnut spectacle just because of your racisms.

    Comment by JD (29e1cd) — 5/2/2011 @ 11:43 am

  18. “You catch that? Not capture him, but to kill him, as verified in this Reuters story. Not to be urinating on the parade float, here, but isn’t that a mistake?”

    I really gotta disagree. The public spectacle of a trial, with the prospect of a defense lawyer actually shilling for him on TV, all the headaches and bellyaching – forget it. Much better just to cap him, it’s a much more fitting end, and damn the intel.

    Comment by JohnW (1c4341) — 5/2/2011 @ 11:49 am

  19. damn the intel?

    It’s not bumble’s place to damn the intel. He’s supposed to act in the best interests of national security.

    As presidents go, Daddy Soros’ little buttmunch is such an abysmal ghetto trash scrunt sometimes I just don’t know what to tell you.

    Comment by happyfeet (a55ba0) — 5/2/2011 @ 11:52 am

  20. Bloodythirsty warmongering racists……..who want to kill osama…….wait a minute it was Barack who did it alrighty then let’s have a fiesta.

    Comment by DohBiden (15aa57) — 5/2/2011 @ 11:53 am

  21. I, for one, am glad ObL is dead. I am also glad he is swimming with the fishes. Hopefully, that part of the ocean is loaded with jewfish.

    But true to Obama’s practice of vacillation (Mubarak must go, Mubarak can stay, Qdaffy must go, we are not trying to kill Qdaffy but we can kill his children and grandchilden, Assad is a force for democracy, Assad is a tyrant and must go) we have been told by Obama that ObL was not representative of Islam, or Muslims, only to honor ObL with an Islamic burial (even if there is questions about his being deep sixed) and when asked, Brennen refused to answer if there was an Imam on board ship when ObL was dunked.

    If ObL was NOT representative of Muslims, and was NOT a good and faithful Muslim, why honor him with an Islamic burial? Are we going to be told that if we had chopped his head off, covered him in pigs blood and burned him hanging from a bridge that we would have outraged the Muslims to act like Muslins once again?

    Again, I am glad he is dead. I find no joy in that as I think ObL was smart and had already organized his group to continue on without him. Unfortunately, I think we will see a huge uptick in violence from radical Islam now.

    Comment by retire05 (2d538e) — 5/2/2011 @ 11:53 am

  22. here is part of Michael Moore’s tweetage from his site … these ones are Monday’s

    “The monster we created-yes, WE-in the 1980s by ARMING, FUNDING, &TRAINING him in the art of terror agnst the USSR, finally had 2 b put down.”

    “Which reporter has the courage to say it? “American-armed terrorist from the 80s, Osama bin Laden, was killed earlier today by America.” ”

    “This caps off disastrous few months 4 Al-Qaeda. Non-violent revolts in Egypt, Tunisia, elsewhere were Al-Qaeda’s WORST nightmare. Now this”

    “RT @Oranj: 10 years, 2 wars, 919,967 deaths, and $1,188,263,000,000 later, we managed to kill one person. (Next time START w/ the Seals 1st)”

    “RT @MLS122171 @MMFlint I think one of the correspondents on CBC last night said he was American armed. Good on him.”

    “@bencnn: #binladen’s appeal in Muslimworld was often wildly overstated by those who had vested professional/financial/institutional interest”

    “@Jamiefolk45: @MMFlint The war profiteers should erect a statue of Bin Laden as their greatest benefactor. He made them trillions!”

    “RT @arnez8706 Obama: Sorry it took so long to get you a copy of my birth certificate, I was too busy making sure osama got killed”

    ” “Bin Laden buried at sea.” Total rip-off of last episode, 2nd season of “Sopranos” when Tony dumped Big Pussy overboard.”

    “OBL buried at sea according 2 Muslim tradition. Yes most Muslim funerals I’ve attended, we got in a chopper & tossed the deceased in L. Erie”

    “BREAKING: All Repub candidates drop out of 2012 race, citing “aversion to losing badly.” Would u make Pleasantville play the South Bronx?”

    “Now that bin Laden’s dead, can we put shampoo in our carry on? Can I keep my shoes on? Can we bring all the troops home?”

    “He may be dead, but in a way, he won. We gave up our rights. We passed a PatriotAct. We spent trillions on needless wars. Fear now rules us.”

    “RT @me_irl Beloved character actor Osama bin Laden, star of TV’s “Fox News”, dies age 54

    “From @jaketapper OBL’s DNA was matched w/ that of his sister who died in Boston & whose brain was kept by the U.S. #inaccordancewithmuslimlaw”

    Comment by happyfeet (a55ba0) — 5/2/2011 @ 12:01 pm

  23. JohnW

    Then don’t give him a trial. get all the info you can from him and then shoot him. What’s the moral difference?

    Comment by Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 5/2/2011 @ 12:02 pm

  24. And by the way, isn’t it interesting that Obama himself decided that it was better to avoid taking him alive? Of course not, because then according to Obama’s principles, he’d have to try him and indeed do so on American soil. Killing him avoids that ugly mess. He seems to lack the courage of his convictions on that count and because of that, we lost a potentially valuable source of intel.

    I have to disagree. It is always easier to kill someone than to capture them. While it would have been nice to have gotten him alive, the free-fire orders likely saved a life or two on the part of the SEAL team – no checked fire to make sure you don’t kill the guy you are supposed to bring back.

    Besides, would YOU be able to fly back to base next to the guy and be able to resist the urge to kick him out the door?

    Comment by Scott Jacobs (d027b8) — 5/2/2011 @ 12:07 pm

  25. I am very good at not kicking people out of planes

    Comment by happyfeet (a55ba0) — 5/2/2011 @ 12:08 pm

  26. My apolgies to all; I stand corrected.

    It was only my flawed assumption that the SEAL team would prefer to capture, rather than kill, Bin Laden as a first choice; because of the possible intel, and to avoid any apotheosis or martyr-ization.

    But let me be very clear here, I approve of the results wholeheartedly, and only wish we could be provided the habeus corpus…

    Again, my apologies.

    Comment by Bob Reed (5f2db5) — 5/2/2011 @ 12:09 pm

  27. They could have lopped off his head in accordance with Islamic tradition.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/2/2011 @ 12:10 pm

  28. To quote one of my favorite lines from The West Wing: “I’m just sorry we couldn’t kill him twice”.

    Comment by Scott Jacobs (d027b8) — 5/2/2011 @ 12:15 pm

  29. I guess the intel value really ought to be tremendous, but how do you get that intel out of OBL? Waterboarding? Sure. If you’re willing to do it.

    One thing we need to know is how Obama got such a nice huge compound right next to that military academy. Who in Pakistan’s government let that happen? Is Al Qaida in control of Pakistan’s intelligence agency? Hopefully they have enough intel to learn this without OBL. Frankly, I’m glad he’s dead and we are spared the huge moonbat spectacle of a trial.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/2/2011 @ 12:16 pm

  30. well that’s just it Mr. Dustin – by insisting on the death not capture of bin Laden Obama has helped protect the people who helped protect bin Laden lo these many years

    How did he evade capture so long?

    bumble has ensured that we may never ever know the whole story.

    It was a bad decision. It was a cowardly decision.

    It was a decision that was decidedly not in the best interests of America.

    Comment by happyfeet (a55ba0) — 5/2/2011 @ 12:22 pm

  31. I hope the Navy SEALS had video cams attached to the combat helmets, because the picture I want to see — or rather, the picture the Islamofascists need to see — is the one of bin Laden being a coward and using a woman as a human shield.

    Comment by Kman (5576bf) — 5/2/2011 @ 12:25 pm

  32. kman

    as far as i know that detail hasn’t been confirmed. but otherwise, i whole heartedly agree. if he peed his pants, that would be gravy.

    Comment by Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 5/2/2011 @ 12:28 pm

  33. Yes, Kman, that would be excellent.

    It’s probably the case they used some kind of video. I read a story recently noting they extensively rely on that sort of thing.

    As far as I’m concerned, the women belong in Gitmo or preferably somewhere more discrete until they are tried or the war on terror is over. Anyone harboring OBL needs to be waterboarded in a secret prison until we know everything they know.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/2/2011 @ 12:29 pm

  34. I just had a horrible devious thought…

    What if we didn’t kill him?

    What if, instead of killing him they DID capture him alive? What better way to have free-run on him and be able to do whatever you wanted to get him to talk than say “Well, we WOULD show you the body, but darn it we tossed it out to sea…”

    Comment by Scott Jacobs (d027b8) — 5/2/2011 @ 12:30 pm

  35. I mean, who would ever talk? SEALs keep secrets as big as that every day of their lives…

    Comment by Scott Jacobs (d027b8) — 5/2/2011 @ 12:31 pm

  36. Scott

    > I just had a horrible devious thought…

    Okay, but what was the horrible part of that thought?

    Dustin

    i wouldn’t assume his wives are war criminals. i mean its possible, but it could be just that they are his brainwashed women.

    Comment by Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 5/2/2011 @ 12:31 pm

  37. that would be acceptable I think Mr. Jacobs – I kinda wanna hope that’s the case really

    Comment by happyfeet (a55ba0) — 5/2/2011 @ 12:32 pm

  38. I do not think Bin Laden’s followers were brainwashed by him they were brainwashed by islam.

    Comment by DohBiden (15aa57) — 5/2/2011 @ 12:32 pm

  39. No, pikachu, this was the best possible choice, because then he would have asked for a lawyer from K& S, or even Covington & Burling, and that would have been embarassing.

    Comment by narciso (79ddc3) — 5/2/2011 @ 12:32 pm

  40. How do we get people like those SEALs? I met one, once. Nicest guy, too. Army cooks are more arrogant than that guy was. The complete opposite of the Hollywood portrayal.

    Someone out there could quit right now, tell the press he was on this team, and make millions in movie rights, but I suspect these guys will keep protecting us instead.

    Someone once said that flying those jets into the WTC was brave, but it wasn’t, really. It was desperate and impotent, and the men who did that were crazy and had nothing to do but obey stupidly cruel orders. They relied on threats to unarmed people. Taking on a hardened compound like that must have taken so much planning and work.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/2/2011 @ 12:37 pm

  41. I just disagree Mr. narciso. We’re way way better off knowing what OBL knew than not knowing.

    From a national security perspective there’s really no question that a captured bin Laden would have been far far more valuable than a dead one.

    Comment by happyfeet (a55ba0) — 5/2/2011 @ 12:39 pm

  42. i wouldn’t assume his wives are war criminals. i mean its possible, but it could be just that they are his brainwashed women.

    Comment by Aaron Worthing —

    They harbored a mass murderer. At the very least, they need a trial and interrogation. I realize that to OBL, they were just cattle, but to me, OBL’s women are moral agents and responsible for their choices.

    It seems quite urgent that we find out more about this Pakistan connection before they nuke somebody.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/2/2011 @ 12:39 pm

  43. happyfeet, Michael Moore is an idiot and a liar.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 5/2/2011 @ 12:39 pm

  44. It’s official.

    Comment by DohBiden (15aa57) — 5/2/2011 @ 12:40 pm

  45. oh. Thank you. I did not know that about Michael Moore.

    Comment by happyfeet (a55ba0) — 5/2/2011 @ 12:40 pm

  46. He’s really Bill Paxon’s character in ‘Weird Science’ come to life:

    Comment by narciso (79ddc3) — 5/2/2011 @ 12:41 pm

  47. sorry, wordpress ate alot of my video. i hope i restored all of it. let me know if any is missing.

    Comment by Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 5/2/2011 @ 12:48 pm

  48. btw, updated to show confirmation of the osama human shield story. cool

    Comment by Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 5/2/2011 @ 12:50 pm

  49. AW:

    I don’t think Limbaugh was truly praising Obama. From what I understand, he was being very sarcastic.

    You might want to listen to what Rush was saying in the subsequent hours of his program today:

    http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201105020008

    Comment by Kman (5576bf) — 5/2/2011 @ 12:52 pm

  50. kman

    citing media matters? hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

    Comment by Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 5/2/2011 @ 1:09 pm

  51. Michael Moore-on seems to be just as ill informed as Kman.

    It was the Democratic Party, that Moore-on so beloves, that allowed the Taliban to take over in Afghanistan. Funny how no one on the left ever talks about how Charlie Wilson (D-Tx) warned Congress that if we did not provide “nation building” (for lack of a better term) for Afghanistan, and help them install a legitimate government, that pulling support from the Mujahadeen would resort in disaster and that would be a mistake that we would pay for in the end.

    It was the very withdrawal of support for the Afghanis that allowed the Taliban to take over. Probably the best book ever written on the events that lead up to the creation of Al Qaeda, and 9-11 is The Looming Tower.

    So, as they did in Southeast Asia in Vietnam, the Democratic controlled Congress pulled support in Afghanistan when the Russians left that country. And we reaped the results of that decision on September 11, 2001 because what we stopped supplying, in aid and government building, the Taliban did.

    It was a mistake to pull support for the South Vietnamese (after it had been promised) and it was a mistake to pull support for the Mujahadeen when we could have exercised tremendous influence after Russia left Afghanistan.

    But that is the way the Democrats roll and when things turn to shit, they find a way to blame Republicans. Sorry, Dems, but Charlie Wilson was one of your own, and he said you were wrong.

    Comment by retire05 (2d538e) — 5/2/2011 @ 1:11 pm

  52. the story is changing already

    Brennan said that if U.S. forces had the opportunity to take him alive, “we would have done that.” But he and other officials said bin Laden resisted.

    Comment by happyfeet (a55ba0) — 5/2/2011 @ 1:13 pm

  53. citing media matters? hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

    Listen to the recording, AW. And judge for yourself.

    Comment by Kman (5576bf) — 5/2/2011 @ 1:13 pm

  54. In accordance with Islamic practice, bin Laden was washed and wrapped in a white sheet before buried at sea at 2 a.m. local time, senior U.S. military and intelligence officials said.*

    what a bullshit little country America has become

    Comment by happyfeet (a55ba0) — 5/2/2011 @ 1:16 pm

  55. thanks happy for that. it went in as an update.

    Comment by Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 5/2/2011 @ 1:17 pm

  56. yes you are welcome… for #51 you mean just for to be clear

    Comment by happyfeet (a55ba0) — 5/2/2011 @ 1:18 pm

  57. IIRC how burial at sea goes, one could argue they DID waterboard him.

    Comment by jim2 (6482d8) — 5/2/2011 @ 1:18 pm

  58. Others are reporting that Rush was being sarcastic.

    Comment by Kman (5576bf) — 5/2/2011 @ 1:20 pm

  59. Rush is right to praise Obama’s decision. Wow, is he effusive! He’s also right about the excellence of our military. Can you imagine how short these wars would be if the guys in the field had the same ROEs as this team did?

    Let them loose, end it!

    Comment by Patricia (f8db02) — 5/2/2011 @ 1:21 pm

  60. happy, right.

    Comment by Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 5/2/2011 @ 1:21 pm

  61. A dynamic entry raid by two score Seal Team Six people does not leave time for leisurely discussions of intentions.

    Intentionally.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 5/2/2011 @ 1:22 pm

  62. Kman, I don’t see what’s so offensive about Rush’s commentary.

    Your link seems to think it’s so horrible that Rush would praise Obama while noting that some of this is a little bit obvious. Seems reasonable to me.

    What I heard in that speech was Obama lying about how we found OBL. He claimed it began in 2009, thanks to his instructions to make OBL a top priority. The truth is that it already was one, and the break came in 2007, and via waterboarding. Obama already said that he had a priority over that method of gaining intel. In other words, it’s possible that Obama made OBL a top priority if he knowingly made the method we used to find Obama second to different priority.

    Rush takes it in a different direction. Sure, Obama deserves credit for the success of the mission, but it’s worthy of a chuckle that he would claim to be personally sifting through the intel and planning the strike.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/2/2011 @ 1:26 pm

  63. I think Rush was saying ‘good job, but you’re a little full of yourself to try to take quite as much credit as you have.

    Anyhow, Kman claims Rush congratulating Obama was sarcasm, but his link says “So far, so good. But too good?” about the initial praise. It’s not until the next part of his comments that Rush isn’t praising in earnest.

    So Kman’s own link explained how Kman is wrong. Yes, it’s true, Rush criticized Obama after congratulating his success, and when I hear it, that’s is not hard to understand at all.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/2/2011 @ 1:29 pm

  64. happyfeet, Charlie Wilson warned that by backing out of Afghanistan, after Wilson had worked so hard to make friends there in the Afghanis battle against Russia, would result in things we would not like. Was he wrong?

    No, he wasn’t. And while Charlie may have been a party boy, he was a visionary about the Middle East and what part we needed to play there.

    Our refusal to help the Afghanis after they chased the Russians out of their war-torn nation was a major mistake. They were going to get funding from somewhere, and it was no longer us. It was a Saudi from a very wealthy family that split with the mujahadeen and created a violent organization who was seen as not just a military leader, but a spiritual leader, as well. If we agree on anything, it should be that Muslims are guided by their religion more than any other influence, and ObL provided them with arms and spiritual direction.

    How can those events be the fault of Republicans when it was the Democrats who backed out on on the Afghanis by refusing to provide them aid? Or have you forgotten that Congress controls the federal purse strings? Had we helped them, as we have tried to help the Iraqis, in building a government that would be friendly to the western world, we would not be in the place we are now.

    Comment by retire05 (2d538e) — 5/2/2011 @ 1:30 pm

  65. hey you missed a spot

    oh thanks. Ok there you go.

    He looks so peaceful.

    You did a great job. Now we just need to wrap him up. What’s the thread count on these ones?

    Oh don’t use those ones here these ones are 600s.

    Perfectamundo!

    Are you going to the service?

    Yes of course I wanna make sure they ease him gently into the sea.

    Yes yes he should float gently into the arms of Allah not make a graceless kersplashy splash kind of entrance.

    Oh no that wouldn’t do at all.

    Comment by happyfeet (a55ba0) — 5/2/2011 @ 1:34 pm

  66. Kman, I don’t see what’s so offensive about Rush’s commentary.

    Dustin, you really have some problems with English.

    I never said Rush’s commentary was offensive. I just said that I think he was mocking Obama. Rush has a tendency to act absurd in order to show the absurd — in this case, he’s mocking the notion (which nobody makes, but that’s beside the point) that Obama masterminded the raid on the bin Laden compound.

    I wasn’t making any point other than to offer to A.W. a suggestion that Limbaugh was having a giggle at Obama’s expense, rather than showing unity. Just throwing it out there. I could be wrong (you can never tell with Rush sometimes). If A.W. wants to think differently, that’s fine with me — it’s his post.

    Comment by Kman (5576bf) — 5/2/2011 @ 1:35 pm

  67. Mr. retire I haven’t the foggiest what you’re on about really. I think I probably generally agree with you though.

    Comment by happyfeet (a55ba0) — 5/2/2011 @ 1:35 pm

  68. Maybe kmart will link think regress next.

    Comment by JD (109425) — 5/2/2011 @ 1:39 pm

  69. I never said Rush’s commentary was offensive. I just said that I think he was mocking Obama.

    You just can’t help it, can you? You’re the one complaining about Rush’s congratulations to Obama. My reaction, that there’s nothing wrong with it, and that your description of your link wasn’t very accurate, don’t fail just because you didn’t use the word ‘offensive’. You lunatic, I just think it wasn’t offensive, upsetting, wrong, or anything like that, that Rush congratulates Obama in clear terms, and your link even notes that this congratulations is ‘so far so good’ before Rush offers some mockery of the way Obama took credit for the operation.

    There is nothing offensive about how Rush handled that.

    you’re the one whining about this, linking Media Matters and other places, trying to show something is wrong with pointing out the fact Rush congratulated Obama.

    Once again, you take some really dishonest defense of your own argument’s failure. Yes, I grant you didn’t use the word ‘offensive’, but still, there’s nothing here to complain about, is there?

    Just throwing it out there. I could be wrong (you can never tell with Rush sometimes).

    Well, I think it’s pretty clear this time you were wrong. Maybe you finally listened to him and understand I was right. It’s possible to mock someone you just earnest congratulated, you know.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/2/2011 @ 1:40 pm

  70. happyfeet, are you able to do dot-to-dot? I first said that Michael Moore-on was an idiot. Now what did Moore-on do? He blamed Republicans for supplying arms to ObL via Reagan.

    Now, if you can’t understand that my comments about Charlie Wilson are a total dispute of Moore-on’s comments, then I don’t know what to tell you. It was not Republicans who pulled the funding, and assistance, to Afghanistan when we had the opportunity to exercise extreme influence in the region.

    Had we done that, supported the Afghanis desire to create a government, and a nation that could take care of its people, ObL would have been just another Saudi interferring in Afghani politics, not the bag man and spiritual leader he became.

    Comment by retire05 (2d538e) — 5/2/2011 @ 1:43 pm

  71. Dustin

    you have to understand. he gets his orders from media matters.

    Comment by Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 5/2/2011 @ 1:46 pm

  72. Cindy Sheehan is qualified to talk about stupid.

    Comment by DohBiden (15aa57) — 5/2/2011 @ 1:46 pm

  73. Good job Mr President. Now about that “Obama is an abysmal failure” argument…

    Comment by The Emperor (81198e) — 5/2/2011 @ 1:48 pm

  74. The Emperor, he still is an abysmal failure. By his own standards, see the employment projections put out by the White House in early 2009 to justify the faux stimulus.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 5/2/2011 @ 1:49 pm

  75. AW:

    you have to understand. he gets his orders from media matters.

    Don’t say that to Dustin. He will take it literally.

    Comment by Kman (5576bf) — 5/2/2011 @ 1:50 pm

  76. Yes SPQR, the economy is doing so badly.. it has only gotten worse. Shame on you Mr Obama!

    Comment by The Emperor (8011fc) — 5/2/2011 @ 1:54 pm

  77. The Emperor, the economy has done worse than what Obama’s own economics advisors told us would happen without the faux stimulus.

    So I’m only judging him on his own standards.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 5/2/2011 @ 1:56 pm

  78. Oh, and The Emperor, Obama campaigned on how he would do a better job of prosecuting the war in Afghanistan.

    But that’s gotten worse too.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 5/2/2011 @ 1:57 pm

  79. Michael Moore is an idiot he does NOT win aussie 80s dance party!

    Comment by happyfeet (a55ba0) — 5/2/2011 @ 1:59 pm

  80. And a word of caution, and a historical analogy is in order. Just as Bin Laden was the architect of the 9/11 attacks, so too was Admiral Yamamoto the mastermind behind the sneak-attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941. While Yamamoto was killed in perhaps the longest-range fighter intercept ever, on April 14, 1943, the war with Japan continued until August 15, 1945-nearly 2 1/2 years later !

    Bob: good comment – though if I remember correctly from the history books, the targeted killing of Yamomoto was also critizied at the time.

    Comment by Joe_dallas (5646aa) — 5/2/2011 @ 1:59 pm

  81. Kmart is in rare form.

    Comment by JD (60e025) — 5/2/2011 @ 2:02 pm

  82. SPQR @76, he also promised to capture and kill Osama bin laden.. A promised delivered. Good on him..

    Comment by The Emperor (cb727f) — 5/2/2011 @ 2:02 pm

  83. Using a female as a human shield probably elevates his status in the islamic world. After all it is a religion that treats half its people as “second class” slaves. Extols individuals that belong on the local sex offender lists, etc.

    Comment by Joe (5646aa) — 5/2/2011 @ 2:02 pm

  84. Using a woman as a human shield? That’s Abbottabad as it gets! :) :D >D

    Comment by Harvey Kneeslapper (eca0f0) — 5/2/2011 @ 2:40 pm

  85. I have been vainly waiting to see comments from anyone of the Islamic persuasion concerning this newsworthy news. Cair? Keith Ellison?, Abdul Rauf the Ground Zero Imam?

    Have I missed it?

    Comment by elissa (25897c) — 5/2/2011 @ 2:40 pm

  86. “…one of bin Laden’s sons alleges that things will get worse on the terrorism front…”

    A Jihadi vows that his highest duty is to kill Infidels and to be in Paradise with Allah, a Marine says his highest duty is to facilitate that meeting…or words to that effect.
    Note to Mr. bin-Laden, fils…
    Bring it on, there’s more where this came from!

    Comment by AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 5/2/2011 @ 2:47 pm

  87. For those on the Left celebrating the resoluteness of Teh Won over the incompetence of Boosh, all I can say is:
    A stopped clock is right twice a day.

    Comment by AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 5/2/2011 @ 2:51 pm

  88. I would not be surprised if the underlying ROE was that all males, and anyone with a weapon, was to be shot as many times as it took to stop them.

    Comment by AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 5/2/2011 @ 2:58 pm

  89. AD-RtR, I’m still confused on how this shows Obama’s superiority. The operation used the results of an interrogation program that Obama condemned, at a facility that Obama condemned and promised to close/end, to facilitate surveillance that seems to have begun before Obama became President, all to conduct a targeted assassination of the kind that Obama’s supporters had condemned.

    And yet this is Obama’s triumph? Well, only in that Obama was smart enough to ditch the horse manure he used to get the left wing dupes to vote for him. The very positions that people like us attacked him for, are now largely abandoned. Some because he evidently was better advised after election and some because of his failed “leadership”.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 5/2/2011 @ 2:59 pm

  90. Bin Laden Assassination – Hamas Condemns It, PA Welcomes It,

    Considering that last week the PA and Hamas agreed on a merger, I doubt that “PA welcomes it” headline. Meanwhile in Jerusalem, the Arab “street” showed how it feels about the news by rioting. (Silwan is a “village” in the same sense that Greenwich Village is a village; it’s less than a mile from the Old City. It’s better known in English as Siloam.)

    Comment by Milhouse (ea66e3) — 5/2/2011 @ 3:01 pm

  91. What an election year this would be… :)

    Comment by The Emperor (0ee5cd) — 5/2/2011 @ 3:11 pm

  92. Emperor, are you claiming the reason you’re happy about this is mere partisan politics? It’s probably for the best that you keep that kind of ugliness to yourself.

    Honestly, it’s a good thing for democrats to realize that following Bush’s lead is a good thing, even if they do so for mere politics. I hope that’s not all that’s going on for Obama. Don’t be a classless clown. It’s great that Obama’s administration has had this success. Let’s remember they didn’t do it just for electoral gains.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/2/2011 @ 3:14 pm

  93. I know Dustin, I know. My apologies. I just couldn’t resist.

    Comment by The Emperor (31960f) — 5/2/2011 @ 3:22 pm

  94. The Chimperor is still on her knees begging to be the next to knob Teh One.

    Comment by JD (380601) — 5/2/2011 @ 3:23 pm

  95. For more of the hypocrisy of Obama, contrast what the US just did with respect to OBL with Obama’s condemnation of Israel’s methods of dealing with attacks from Hamas.

    Oh, and just to remind us: “We condemn the assassination and the killing of an Arab holy warrior. We ask God to offer him mercy with the true believers and the martyrs.” Ismail Haniyeh, Hamas’ Prime Minister in Gaza.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 5/2/2011 @ 3:23 pm

  96. it’s a good thing for democrats to realize that following Bush’s lead is a good thing,
    Following Bush’s lead? How so? If I can recall Bush was really not interested in pursuing OBL. He even said so. He was more preoccupied with finding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq that weren’t there. I think Obama went the opposite direction.

    Comment by The Emperor (e0cf74) — 5/2/2011 @ 3:27 pm

  97. There actually were weapons of mass destruction but they were moved to syria but let’s not let facts get in the way.

    Comment by DohBiden (15aa57) — 5/2/2011 @ 3:29 pm

  98. SPQR…
    It’s the old story, the President gets the glory when things go well, and he gets the blame when everything gets flushed down the crapper.
    It’s not right, it just is.

    But, on a high note, anything that happens that reinforces the impression that Cyndy Sheehan is stark raving mad can’t be a bad thing.

    DB…please, don’t confuse lovey with facts, it will only reinforce the cognitive dissonance that she operates with.

    Comment by AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 5/2/2011 @ 3:35 pm

  99. DohBiden@95.
    If they were moved to Syria, why didnt’t we go there to get them?

    Comment by The Emperor (b267cc) — 5/2/2011 @ 3:41 pm

  100. By a show of hands, who missed this brand of idiocy?

    Comment by JD (380601) — 5/2/2011 @ 3:50 pm

  101. AD, still the bitter man. Nothing new there. wooooooohooooooo!!! USA! USA!! USA!!! USA!!!!

    Comment by The Emperor (8180a5) — 5/2/2011 @ 3:52 pm

  102. That Chinese video was great.

    Especially, the part with the pigs.

    Comment by Dave Surls (3406b9) — 5/2/2011 @ 3:54 pm

  103. Southern Poverty Tard Center would consider that post hate speech.

    Comment by DohBiden (15aa57) — 5/2/2011 @ 3:56 pm

  104. JD, its not really a “brand”. Its pretty generic idiocy.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 5/2/2011 @ 3:57 pm

  105. Yes, why wouldn’t we invade a country led by a Great Reformer?

    lovey is still a P/A idiot, who loves false gods.
    And Yes, I’m still bitterly clinging to my guns and religion.

    Comment by AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 5/2/2011 @ 4:00 pm

  106. the war on terrorism may be over but bumble’s war on jobs proceeds energetically with a huge regulatory power grab

    The head of the U.S. agency that oversees offshore oil production said Monday the agency would extend its ability to impose penalties not only against oil and gas companies, but also against the contractors they hire to work in offshore leases.

    Historically, the brunt of the regulatory oversight held by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement has been solely focused on so-called operators, the oil and gas companies that own the leases where fossil fuels are found, and control the multibillion-dollar projects needed to extract them.

    After studying the issue, the agency concluded it has “broad legal authority over all activities relating to offshore leases, whether engaged in by lessees, operators or contractors,” BOEMRE chief Michael Bromwich said in a speech to energy executives at the Offshore Technology Conference in Houston.

    the same failshit US government what took over a decade to find one scrawny little terrorist and even then bungled his capture is now going to regulate every conceivable facet of oil drillings?

    Awesome.

    Comment by happyfeet (a55ba0) — 5/2/2011 @ 4:00 pm

  107. If I can recall Bush was really not interested in pursuing OBL. He even said so. He was more preoccupied with finding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq that weren’t there.

    You don’t recall correctly. Bush was interested in dismantling Al Qaida, using all the intel he could get. Obama specifically noted he had a higher priority than this, and was willing to make it harder to get good intel, when demanding waterboarding not be used. Bush’s leadership on Gitmo, prisons in romania, and interrogation, are why we learned about this courier in 2007.

    Of course, this courier used to be in the Iraqi Army if I remember right (that one is grain of salt worthy).

    The idea Bush put Osama Bin Laden aside because of WMDs in Iraq is an old lie of the democrat party that claims Gitmo must be closed, waterboarding didn’t aid our war, and the rest of that nonsense.

    No, Obama obviously followed Bush’s lead on such things.

    Now, Bush was right that Osama Bin Laden was not the most important thing. Protecting America was. I see no contradiction there. It’s a fact that Saddam had WMD programs. Just as Pelosi, Clinton, Reid, Gore, and the rest of the world. We even found weapons there, and shut down a very dangerous regime, freeing millions of people from a tyrant.

    A free middle east is the only way we win the war on terror. Killing Osama Bin Laden is a great victory, and I don’t mean to diminish that, but it’s not as important as what Bush accomplished in Iraq by a long shot. Tens of millions of voters, dealing with a new democracy, is tremendously more important.

    Oh well, I see you’re just trying to score political points with this. That’s just trashy. You aren’t here to have an intelligent conversation. You actually think we’re unhappy about this? Sad.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/2/2011 @ 4:04 pm

  108. That was my comment above.

    Sorry!

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/2/2011 @ 4:05 pm

  109. @Barack Obama, sockpuppet.. oops!!

    Comment by The Emperor (d95dde) — 5/2/2011 @ 4:08 pm

  110. Yeah, my bad.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/2/2011 @ 4:11 pm

  111. @Dustin, how does it feel to just obfuscate and twist against the wind of truth? You sit there to say that going to Iraq, a country that posed not imminent threat to america as of then was better than finding and killing Osama Bin laden, a man who actualy masterminded the worst attack on American soil since the Pearl harbor? That going to Iraq is better than taking out OBL? Meeen, am losing respect for you. Good luck selling that to the American voters next year.

    Comment by The Emperor (be414a) — 5/2/2011 @ 4:17 pm

  112. but honestly, emperor, it’s quite plain that Obama has adopted Bush’s policies, and the reason this was a success are Bush policies.

    That is strong compliment to Obama. I’m glad he successfully followed Bush’s leadership, because if he hadn’t, Obama wouldn’t have been able to announce we killed Osama.

    I think there’s a lesson there for you and other die hard partisans to learn. When Obama was done campaigning, and the serious work of leading this country began, he did not follow through on his campaign rhetoric. Gitmo is open. Tribunals will stay. Intel from waterboarding is used effectively. Obama’s secdef when Osama was killed? Bush’s secdef. His general? Bush’s. Even his killteam was probably that one the left freaked out about, calling it Cheney’s assassination squad. Certainly these are very good things.

    If you can’t see that, it’s your own partisanship blinding you. That your comment here was just to imagine the election consequences is sad, though I realize you were trying to somehow turn this into something to gloat about.

    Don’t you understand that we’re all in this together?

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/2/2011 @ 4:18 pm

  113. Eff off emperor

    Saddam and Osama did have a mutual realtionship of america hatred.

    Comment by DohBiden (15aa57) — 5/2/2011 @ 4:21 pm

  114. Good luck selling that to the American voters next year.

    This isn’t just about winning elections. Perhaps you and Obama politicize everything, but that’s now where I derive moral direction.

    It’s already well understood that staying the course in Iraq was extremely politically costly for the GOP. If that’s all you want to say, there’s really no reason to say it. Might as well tell me that water is wet.

    Yes, freeing tens of millions of people, and stopping a dictator who wanted to kill Americans and had used WMDs ten times before, was more important that killing a single old man who did not actually mastermind 9/11 (KSM did that).

    Do you think I want your respect? You keep boiling serious issues down to the most trashy and base level of partisanship. Fine… you don’t respect me. I think I’ll be ok.

    Speaking of not posing an imminent threat, what about Libya? Speaking of elections, what about the price of gasoline? If you think playing politics with Osama Bin Laden will work, you’ve got another thing coming. You simply cannot use Iraq and an argument to defend the guy who invaded Libya (which, we all know, abandoned its nuclear weapons program thanks to the Iraq war).

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/2/2011 @ 4:23 pm

  115. And then we have this nugget,
    Now, Bush was right that Osama Bin Laden was not the most important thing. Protecting America was.
    Really? I thought protecting American lives would be consistent with killing the man that actually attacked and killed 3000 of them in cold blood. It’s like saying I am not interested in killing the snake, am just interested in protecting my children. Even though the snake had killed one of your children in the past. Killing the snake is not important. Protecting the kids is more important. Right. Makes sense..

    Comment by The Emperor (31960f) — 5/2/2011 @ 4:24 pm

  116. Lovie the dishonest never changes. Those are flagrant lies you are telling, and you know it.

    Comment by JD (380601) — 5/2/2011 @ 4:25 pm

  117. Lovie must be h8in’ that zero went into Lybia. Gee, don’t here much about Lybia anymore, because of the imminent threat K-daffy posed to the US. Oh, that’s right, twas a humanitarian effort, and Saddam wasn’t killing his peeps like K-daffy is now!

    Lovie has to be morally conflicted in his support of O, now that the precedent is a oil thirsty war-mongerer. Give back the peace prize you war criminal!

    Comment by ∅ (e7577d) — 5/2/2011 @ 4:26 pm

  118. here=hear

    Comment by ∅ (e7577d) — 5/2/2011 @ 4:28 pm

  119. Don’t you understand that we’re all in this together?

    Comment by Dustin — 5/2/2011 @ 4:18 pm
    On that we agree, my friend. It is indeed a great day. :)

    Comment by The Emperor (e0cf74) — 5/2/2011 @ 4:28 pm

  120. Lovie is not on your team, Dustin.

    Comment by JD (380601) — 5/2/2011 @ 4:29 pm

  121. Arguing with lovey is like mud-wrestling with a pig:
    All you get is dirty, and the pig enjoys it.

    Comment by AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 5/2/2011 @ 4:30 pm

  122. Really? I thought protecting American lives would be consistent with killing the man that actually attacked and killed 3000 of them in cold blood.

    Not really. The US military completely took apart al Qaida shortly after 9/11. What was left of it flooded into Iraq, which was a battleplace of our choosing, smartly picked because we could win there (not so easy in Pakistan, with its huge population, or Afghanistan, with it’s difficult wasteland).

    That’s how we took Al Qaida down. That’s why after 9/11, we didn’t suffer another successful attack until Obama took office.

    But note that you have completely changed my argument. I already said I don’t want to diminish the importance of finding OBL. It’s just not as important as protecting America.

    9/11 showed us that isolationism, or even just being reactive, was not enough. We could not afford to wait for attacks to come to us. We needed to stop the worst supporters of terrorism, certainly including Saddam’s regime. We needed to stop Qaddafi’s nuke program. We needed to thwart Iran as much as possible.

    This wasn’t easy. In fact, democrats like emperor happily made it much harder to do, in particular with respect to Iran whom they claimed didn’t even have a nuclear weapons program.

    It’s already proven Saddam used WMDs. IT’s already proven we found some, and that he was ready to relaunch his nuclear weapons program if given the chance. He was too dangerous to be left in power, and as a great benefit, removing him allowed democracy to have a fighting chance in Iraq.

    Of course that’s more important than just shooting OBL in the head in his mansion behind a wall with no phone or internet. That’s a no brainer.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/2/2011 @ 4:32 pm

  123. AD, I realize that. Clearly, from his first trashy comment about elections, he wanted to pick a fight with Republicans, whom he apparently hates quite a lot. Even in the wake of a great day like this one, he has to bash Bush, and deny Bush any credit for his policies. That’s sad.

    I don’t see any reason to deny Obama credit for his role, but I guess I’m not deranged with partisanship.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/2/2011 @ 4:33 pm

  124. “If I can recall Bush was really not interested in pursuing OBL. He even said so.”

    Lovey – I think it’s funny that you and the left swallowed crap like that whole rather than thinking it through. Remember when Daddy Bush kept deliberately mispronouncing Saddam’s name? Are you old enough to remember that?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/2/2011 @ 4:35 pm

  125. I can’t believe y’all are in such a hurry to be duped by Rush just because it’s on media matters.

    Comment by gator (b5a79f) — 5/2/2011 @ 4:35 pm

  126. If you oppose communism your racist?

    Because communists support equal misery for all.

    Anyways the emperor is trash.

    Comment by DohBiden (15aa57) — 5/2/2011 @ 4:36 pm

  127. Today, people in this country have almost universally put politics aside and praised President Obama for using the military intelligence he was provided to authorize a daring and successful Seal operation to get Bin Laden. Most people have also been able to see that key intelligence which led to Bin Laden’s demise initially came about on Bush’s watch, using interrogation policies his team put in place. Further, our established military and asset presence in the area for almost a decade is what made the raid and support of the raid feasible.

    The fact that The Emperor is unable to acknowledge the linkages which span both presidencies shows how petty and insincere “it” really is.

    Comment by elissa (25897c) — 5/2/2011 @ 4:36 pm

  128. “gator” – what other names have you used here? Are you always a political hack, or just today?

    Comment by JD (380601) — 5/2/2011 @ 4:38 pm

  129. Why didn’t Bin Laden’s compound have any phone lines or internet connections?

    Thank you New York Times!

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/2/2011 @ 4:38 pm

  130. Some people deny the dawn, and curse the darkness.

    Comment by AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 5/2/2011 @ 4:38 pm

  131. I can’t believe your in such a hurry to call opponents of communism racist just because media masterbaters tells you to.

    Comment by DohBiden (15aa57) — 5/2/2011 @ 4:42 pm

  132. I wanted to condense my thoughts with fewer typos, but thankfully Elissa said what I wanted to, only better, as usual.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/2/2011 @ 4:48 pm

  133. ==Why didn’t Bin Laden’s compound have any phone lines or internet connections==

    So sad. So unfair. Not only did he get shot in the head, but he just missed seeing the wedding of the century.

    Comment by elissa (25897c) — 5/2/2011 @ 4:48 pm

  134. ==Why didn’t Bin Laden’s compound have any phone lines or internet connections==

    because the “stimulus” package has not reached into terrorist camps, yet?

    How did mediamatterz and thinkregress get their talking points when Osama didn’t have email?

    Comment by JD (380601) — 5/2/2011 @ 4:53 pm

  135. See it this way, Bush had 8 years to take this man out but did not because he turned his attention away from hunting down and killing this son of a bitch. he chose instead to pursue some other crazy war that has resulted in needless deaths of precious American service men and women. Not to talk of victims of collateral damage. But just two years into his presidency, Obama has captured and killed this great enemy of America. Two years folks. This could have been Bush’s victory if he had kept his eye on the ball. I know how embarrassing this may be for some of us because of deep partisan inclinations, but nothing can change the fact that in the eyes of the world, this day could have come much earlier than now.

    Comment by The Emperor (656cd4) — 5/2/2011 @ 5:00 pm

  136. why did Obama spend so much time raping the US treasury when he could have immediately caught bin Laden?

    I question his priorities.

    Comment by happyfeet (a55ba0) — 5/2/2011 @ 5:02 pm

  137. Lies, loves. That is all you have.

    Comment by JD (380601) — 5/2/2011 @ 5:05 pm

  138. @JD, I feel your pain. Here, take a chill pill and sleep it off. It will be better in the morning.

    Comment by The Emperor (0e917b) — 5/2/2011 @ 5:14 pm

  139. This is kind of funny-
    Husain Haqqani, Pakistan’s ambassador to Washington, struck a defensive tone in a phone interview:

    “If Whitey Bulger can live undetected by American police for so long, why can’t Osama Bin Laden live undetected by Pakistani authorities?” Haqqani asked. Bulger, the former head of Boston’s Winter Hill gang, was added to the FBI’s 10 Most Wanted List in mid-1999, two months after Bin Laden himself first appeared on the list. Haqqani continued, “The fact is, Mafia figures manage to do this sort of thing in Brooklyn, and Pakistan is a country that does not have the highly-developed law enforcement capabilities that your country possesses.”

    Comment by elissa (25897c) — 5/2/2011 @ 5:20 pm

  140. Pain? Now, you are just making shlt up, like kmart and gator and your troll buddies.

    Comment by JD (85b089) — 5/2/2011 @ 5:20 pm

  141. Now he calls me a troll.. Lmao!! uuurgh am hurt… LOL!!

    Comment by The Emperor (d027b5) — 5/2/2011 @ 5:23 pm

  142. Look idiot back in janurary 2009 Obama didn’t even go after Osama.

    So piss off sideways.

    Comment by DohBiden (15aa57) — 5/2/2011 @ 5:27 pm

  143. LMAO!!!!!!!! Haters!!!!

    Comment by The Emperor (b7d933) — 5/2/2011 @ 5:35 pm

  144. Yes SPQR, the economy is doing so badly.. it has only gotten worse. Shame on you Mr Obama!

    Just give it a year of gas prices over $4 per gallon.

    I’m just waiting for people like Pelosi to start bitching about the price of gas like she did when it was $3.08 a gallon under Bush.

    Make no mistake, the economy will nose-dive mid-winter as heating-oil costs pass every record ever set.

    Comment by Scott Jacobs (d027b8) — 5/2/2011 @ 5:37 pm

  145. USA! USA!!

    We’re all over this story on Common Cents…

    http://www.commoncts.blogspot.com

    Comment by Steve (88e6e2) — 5/2/2011 @ 5:41 pm

  146. I hope, not Scott, but I see no reason why you’re wrong. It’s going to be a summer of expensive food, and a winter of tough energy prices and even more expensive food.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/2/2011 @ 5:41 pm

  147. But the big elephant in the room here is Pakistan. How much are they not telling us about the fact that this man was hiding in plain sight, in a mansion just under their nose. It is inconceivable that they did not know he had been there all those years. Are we about to see another Pandora box open on this? Hmmm..

    Comment by The Emperor (eb7dd2) — 5/2/2011 @ 5:50 pm

  148. USA USA my ass we’re still the same hapless loser little country what begs the Chinese for money every month like a two-dollar hooker begs for a quickie shag

    Comment by happyfeet (760ba3) — 5/2/2011 @ 5:51 pm

  149. @happy, LMFAO!!! I nearly barfed on my key board.. Take your time mon!!

    Comment by The Emperor (b45a1d) — 5/2/2011 @ 6:01 pm

  150. I always enjoy reading the forefront of left-wing political thought. Not only is it profound and articulate, but also so persuasive.

    Comment by Ag80 (9651c7) — 5/2/2011 @ 6:23 pm

  151. Actually “Emperor”, for the first few years after the defeat of the Taliban in Afghanistan, it’s believed that Osama resided in Iran; directing the flow of resources and fighters into that “distraction” as you say which was Iraq…

    AQ’s manpower back was broken in Iraq; it was a question of wills and they lost…

    Osama has most likely only been in Pakistan since circa 2006 or so; about the time that the surge began in Iraq.

    Your enthusiastic truculence demonstrates your impressive partisan zeal, but really is essentially hollow schoolyard shout-down antics.

    This raid has been years in the making. And the very policies that provided the intelligence that enabled the raid to happen were the ones you and your fellow travelers railed against in spittle-spewing fits of rage; during the years that Mr. Bush was establishing policies and protocols that would essentially set the stage for this success.

    If the nation had listened to you folks, today would have never happened.

    Stick to facts instead of descending into Yelverton liked inanities…

    Comment by Bob Reed (5f2db5) — 5/2/2011 @ 6:32 pm

  152. Radley Balko, has an ‘interesting’ ahem take on the recent events.

    Comment by narciso (79ddc3) — 5/2/2011 @ 6:33 pm

  153. A thousand pardons

    directing the flow of resources and fighters into that “distraction”, as you say, which was post-Saddam Iraq…

    Comment by Bob Reed (5f2db5) — 5/2/2011 @ 6:34 pm

  154. “But just two years into his presidency, Obama has captured and killed this great enemy of America.”

    Yes, it’s quite ironic, actually. After years of doing everything he could to undercut the War on Terror in order to secure partisan advantage for himself and his vile political party, Obambi is forced by events to adopt all of Bush’s policies and ends up killing Bin Laden.

    Pretty sweet, except for us having a traitor as POTUS.

    But, that will be fixed in due course.

    Comment by Dave Surls (8259a0) — 5/2/2011 @ 6:35 pm

  155. This raid has been years in the making.

    yes it was Mr. Bob. Years. And billions and billions of dollars were spended in the pursuit of the singularly valuable intelligence this man held.

    And America’s coward fool president orders his head blowed off?

    Jesus Mary and also Joseph.

    There is no word for bumblef*ckery on such an epic scale.

    Comment by happyfeet (760ba3) — 5/2/2011 @ 6:38 pm

  156. I suppose we could just call it “epic buumblef*ckery” it’s not like there’s a rule that there has to be one word

    Comment by happyfeet (760ba3) — 5/2/2011 @ 6:42 pm

  157. oh. except with just the one u.

    I always make typos when I comment when I’m eating salad.

    Comment by happyfeet (760ba3) — 5/2/2011 @ 6:42 pm

  158. Well happyfeet, I hear you my friend.

    I’d suggest that we can all take a measure of solace in the fact that the SEAL team seized a mother load of yummy intelligence; computer hard-drives and what have you. As well as the bonus individuals…

    So at least there’s that.

    Now I’m not defending Obumbles actions, just looking for that sweet silver lining :)

    Comment by Bob Reed (5f2db5) — 5/2/2011 @ 6:45 pm

  159. Oh, and “Emporer”, Osama is estimaed to have lived there for the last 3 years

    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20059009-503544.html

    Which makes sense since it was built around 2005, and for a time was an ISI safe house.

    Pop goes the meme!

    Much more information will come out in due course; either directly, or indirectly by other Tango takedowns.

    Comment by Bob Reed (5f2db5) — 5/2/2011 @ 6:48 pm

  160. I just wish people were looking at this more in terms of an ok what are the lessons learned sort of way. And I would submit that that the first lesson might would be hey maybe we shouldn’t blow the head off of the terrorist ringleader before we interrogate him.

    I mean, I don’t have a background in intelligence or anything…

    Comment by happyfeet (760ba3) — 5/2/2011 @ 6:49 pm

  161. And the very policies that provided the intelligence that enabled the raid to happen were the ones you and your fellow travelers railed against in spittle-spewing fits of rage

    You mean, intelligence gained from a Gitmo detainee through torture-but-we-don’t-call-it-that?

    The news reports I’ve seen it was someone not detained at Gitmo. For obvious reasons, the means used to question that detainee are not known to the public, and may never be.

    So, no. This may have been due to Bush’s policies and protocols, but not to the ones that people protested.

    And if you don’t understand that why the United States needs to act as if it really believes in its ideals if we are to win this struggle with the jihadis–then you have nothing to say that is worth my listening to.

    Comment by kishnevi (07cf78) — 5/2/2011 @ 6:52 pm

  162. “I just wish people were looking at this more in terms of an ok what are the lessons learned sort of way.”

    Lesson: Screw with America, and sooner or later we’ll blow you straight to hell.

    (said Dave, looking at Iran out of the corner of his eye).

    Comment by Dave Surls (8259a0) — 5/2/2011 @ 6:56 pm

  163. for a time was an ISI safe house.
    That fact has implications which I hope people will give proper focus to.

    Comment by kishnevi (06eba9) — 5/2/2011 @ 6:58 pm

  164. “This raid has been years in the making. And the very policies that provided the intelligence that enabled the raid to happen were the ones you and your fellow travelers railed against in spittle-spewing fits of rage…”

    I hate it when lefties do that.

    Gets my shoes all wet.

    I bet it gets Obama angry too.

    Gets his ass all wet.

    Comment by Dave Surls (8259a0) — 5/2/2011 @ 7:02 pm

  165. The body of Osama bin Laden must be buried in the ground, and throwing it into the sea would be a ‘sin’, said Mahmoud Ashour of the Al Azhar Academy of Islamic Research, the most prestigious Sunni educational institute, while speaking to ANSA.

    The Al Azhar official rejected the idea of sea burial of the Al Qaida leader for “trivial motives”, explaining that even when someone drowns, the body must be searched for in order to be able to “bury it in the ground”. “They should bury it in the ground without putting anything on the grave,” explained Ashour, responding to a question about whether Osama bin Laden’s burial could become a sort of pilgrimage site.

    Personally I don’t give a rats ass about what this yahoo Mahmoud Ashour of the Al Azhar Academy of Islamic Research thinks about the disposal of bin-Laden’s body. It’s stunning he deigns to tell anyone that it would be a sin to have thrown it into the sea.

    Really?

    With the blood of 3,000+ people on bin-Laden’s hands and he has the temerity to bring up sin?

    I think burying him at sea was far more than he deserved. And I am dreading seeing some pol or pundit start apologizing for no burial on land.

    Comment by Dana (4eca6e) — 5/2/2011 @ 7:02 pm

  166. Please don’t be so cryptic Kishnevi; say precisely what you mean if you please. You see, I’m a bit slow on the uptake sometimes, and would never want to waste anyone’s time blathering about things they needn’t listen to…

    Comment by Bob Reed (5f2db5) — 5/2/2011 @ 7:03 pm

  167. It may have happened in Romania, Thailand, Poland, or Mauritania, the point is we weren’t supposed to know this, just know that the problem had been handled, the techniques were all declassified back in 2009 With enough detail, they’ve designed their
    own version of SERE to train new recruits to resist.

    Comment by narciso (79ddc3) — 5/2/2011 @ 7:06 pm

  168. It was the threatened deadly caterpillar torture is what I heard.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/2/2011 @ 7:18 pm

  169. Maybe the celebrating lefties will now give Israel a break on targeted assassinations, but somehow I doubt it. Israel needs a cool black president or something.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/2/2011 @ 7:20 pm

  170. I’ve got to think that the job-of-the-day at GITMO that they probably had to draw straws for, just to be fair, was the soldier/sailor/Marine/airman/Guardsman who got to go see KSM and thank him for all of his help in turning OBL room-temperature.
    He, or she, won’t have to buy a drink at the club for weeks.

    Comment by AD-RtR/OS! (dd2edb) — 5/2/2011 @ 7:30 pm

  171. Reuters is reporting bin Laden’s wife was not used as a shield.

    A woman killed during the U.S. raid of Osama bin Laden’s compound in Pakistan was not his wife and was not used as a human shield by the al Qaeda leader before his death, a U.S. official said on Monday, correcting an earlier description.

    John Brennan, President Barack Obama’s top counter- terrorism adviser, told reporters earlier that the slain woman had been one of bin Laden’s wives and had been used — perhaps voluntarily — as a shield during the firefight.
    Newspaper headlines and clippings are posted on a wall inside a staff office at the White House in Washington May 2, 2011, the morning after U.S. President Barack Obama announced the death of Osama bin Laden. (REUTERS/Jason Reed)

    However, a different White House official said that account had turned out not to be the case. Bin Laden’s wife was injured but not killed in the assault.

    Comment by Dana (4eca6e) — 5/2/2011 @ 7:37 pm

  172. Narciso has a big point. Obama’s admin declassified tons of very important info about the methods that we needed to get good intel.

    Tough to swallow, given what we now know, but there you go.

    Dana, doesn’t your correction only say she wasn’t killed, rather than saying OBL didn’t use her as a shield? I would hope to hell we don’t have anyone in our admin stupid enough to correct the record to protect Obama’s image. If they are correcting it, that’s a good sign that perhaps they will release the video after all.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/2/2011 @ 7:47 pm

  173. I’m not saying that bin Laden didn’t use a woman as a human shield.

    However, two reports quoting anonymous officials saying ‘X’ is not a ‘confirmation’. In fact, a lot of times if they are wire reports, they are just rewrites.

    Comment by stari_momak (d5f987) — 5/2/2011 @ 7:54 pm

  174. The news reports I’ve seen it was someone not detained at Gitmo.

    Don’t those say secret prisons, such as Romania?

    However, I read reports that KSM’s waterboarding led to intel. The point is that we did get this intel via hard interrogation of detainees in 2007, so that leads to many reasonable conclusions.

    Regardless, I think it’s legitimate to debate whether or not we should use techniques such as waterboarding to prevent things like 9/11 style attacks (and I believe that is exactly what happened). It doesn’t seem legitimate to use the claim that this technique doesn’t produce good results, but if someone wants to take an absolute position against the practice, that is a political position worthy of our election system.

    I grumble that Obama seemed to do exactly this with a wide, wide variety of policies, not limited to unilateral engagement and even generally bombings, but also torture (to use his term, meaning the broader category of ‘enhanced interrogation’ of course) and detainee facilities, as well as military tribunals.

    I have a huge problem with someone making a political issue out of that, but not sincerely following through. Playing politics with national security is a path for cowards and liars to gain a lot of power. We see this all the time in politics. The GOP barely cuts spending, or barely cuts taxes, and who will I vote for? Well, Obama did that with the antiwar crowd, and his rhetoric undermined Bush at several turns. On national security, I think politicians should be expected to mean what they say, at the very least.

    I’m glad you’re willing to condemn waterboarding (if that’s what you mean) today. That’s not the easiest position to take right now, and that shows principles. We need people to debate both sides of this issue with honesty.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/2/2011 @ 7:58 pm

  175. Dustin, I did mean that.
    In the meantime, this is a summary of what I read in a post that I clicked through to from something on Patterico’s sidebar, so now I can’t find it.
    1)KSM told his interrogators the nickname/nom de guerre/alias/whatever you call it for one of Osama’s couriers. We don’t know whether he gave this piece of info before, during or after being waterboarded.
    2)The guy who took KSM’s place and then was himself captured was interrogated at a black site, underwent enhanced interrogation techniques (not specified), and several months after that gave the same piece of information during standard interrogation.
    3)A considerable time later, the CIA figured out the real name and general geographical location (meaning which part of the Eurasian landmass) of the courier, and then eventually tracked his precise location. Once they knew that, they noticed the house, and things went on from there.
    What kind of sources and information gathering/interrogation were used to accomplish point 3 remain unspecified. I would suspect that we had at least one agent in the house, because the planners of the operation were able to not only map out the house but construct an exact replica which the Seals used to train for the operation.

    Comment by kishnevi (07cf78) — 5/2/2011 @ 9:22 pm

  176. I would suspect that we had at least one agent in the house, because the planners of the operation were able to not only map out the house but construct an exact replica which the Seals used to train for the operation.

    I can’t intelligently speculate, but on 24, they had a satellite that could scan the building. I saw Bob Villa do something like that, only he was right at the house. I bet we could penetrate the building enough to model it, without them knowing we had.

    I think your summary (1,2,3) is pretty accurate. I mean… we don’t really know all the details yet (hopefully we will eventually).

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/2/2011 @ 9:27 pm

  177. Dustin

    you don’t need an agent in the house. just the plans for it. :-)

    Who knows what happened. surely we won’t know the whole story for years to come, if ever. i mean how long did we go without knowing about the enigma device?

    Comment by Aaron Worthing (73a7ea) — 5/2/2011 @ 9:28 pm

  178. It does say so much about us that we build a model and used these amazing men to practice infiltrating it. It’s a very imposing compound. Those men trained all their adult lives, and the intel was processed painstakingly since 2001 (and we were actually searching for OBL for several years before 9/11).

    We are a determined nation, when we want to be. We can damn near do anything, so long as we just keep working at it.

    I was expecting Obama’s speech to be along those lines, so you can imagine my (already partisan) annoyance when Obama’s tale started when Obama personally made this a priority in 2009, and then Obama personally analyzed the intel, etc etc etc.

    But that’s democracy for you. Least bad system we’ve got, and bane of Osama Bin Laden’s existence.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/2/2011 @ 9:34 pm

  179. The left sure love being hypocrites.

    They complain about overpopulation but let illegals flood america.

    They complain about bush’s war crimes and torture but have no problem using torture and things they deemed war crimes.

    They complain about islamophobia but have no problem engaging in Judeophobia.

    And isn’t it ironic that Bush’s policies lead to Obama killing Osama but since it is a war crime what bush did Obama won’t give Bush credit.

    Comment by DohBiden (15aa57) — 5/2/2011 @ 9:38 pm

  180. kish,

    It was after. He wasn’t talking before being waterboarded.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 5/2/2011 @ 9:39 pm

  181. Dustin

    yeah, you have to expect a LITTLE bragging from Obama, but he kept it pretty low key.

    The fact is he has lifetime immunity now on the war on terror. he would have to massively F— up for him not to be able to counter every criticism, “hey, i got bin laden, didn’t it?”

    The problem is for him that 2012 isn’t likely to be a national security election.

    Comment by Aaron Worthing (73a7ea) — 5/2/2011 @ 9:39 pm

  182. _______________________________________

    throwing it into the sea would be a ‘sin’,

    If that’s correct then I’m glad the way his body was disposed of actually wasn’t to accommodate his theology.

    It’s bad enough the US military allowed the army doctor who went on a murder spree at Fort Hood to be treated with kid gloves in the name of political correctness run amok. I didn’t want to see the same dynamics at work in the way bin Laden’s corpse had been handled.

    Comment by Mark (411533) — 5/2/2011 @ 9:40 pm

  183. I dont really understand why you would need to comply with the Islamic burial requirements… if Osama represents what Islam is, then why would we honor the demands of a terrible religion? And if the religion was perverted by Osama, i.e., he is not a true muslim, then what is the rationale for burying him ‘as a muslim’, in accordance with their traditions? He wasn’t a true muslim, he was a terrorist, so why pretend he was and bury him as one? This makes no sense other than to appease muslims around the world who revere him

    Comment by jaxson (352628) — 5/2/2011 @ 10:11 pm

  184. 2 years ago obama did not capture Bin Laden but yet these racist idiots insist since Bush is white he was incompetent.

    Comment by DohBiden (15aa57) — 5/2/2011 @ 10:29 pm

  185. Whoops – do you really want to see the video now?

    Comment by Gerry (bedf22) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:01 am

  186. If it’s a war crime to target Qadaffy Duck for assassination, as Obama Administration insists, then why wasn’t it a war crime to target OBL? Inquiring minds want to know.

    Comment by eaglewingz08 (74f660) — 5/3/2011 @ 11:47 am

  187. If it’s a war crime to target Qadaffy Duck for assassination, as Obama Administration insists, then why wasn’t it a war crime to target OBL? Inquiring minds want to know.

    Little thing called “declaration of war”.

    Comment by Kman (5576bf) — 5/3/2011 @ 12:06 pm

  188. Yes, Kman’s right. There’s a major difference in that we have authorized approval from congress to do whatever it takes to bring 9/11 perps to justice.

    As Obama already explained, invading countries without congressional approval is unconstitutional. He broke his oath of office with Libya, by his own code, and that seems to be a major reason the Libyan effort is not being conducted under Bush doctrines.

    Obama should go to Congress and get an AUMF for Libya. Or he should back out. I want him to succeed, or at least avoid a mistake. Going to war half heartedly is a mistake.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/3/2011 @ 12:19 pm

  189. The issue is not if Osama was caught through systems put in place by Bush. The issue is why didnt he use those systems to focus on capturing the man who attacked and killed 3000 Americans on American soil? And forget about making the lame argument that going to Iraq was a necessary measure towards capturing OBL. I am just not buying that. Am not drinking that stuff they gave you all to drink. Tell that to the fishes feeding on OBL’s corpse.

    Comment by The Emperor (d7f70c) — 5/3/2011 @ 5:39 pm

  190. Emperor, you’ve got the wrong end of the stick. Suppose you explain to us why killing bin Laden is such an all-consuming priority. How exactly are we safer now than we were before his death? It’s nice to know he’s dead, but it would have been criminal and insane to divert resources from vital security needs in order to achieve it.

    Comment by Milhouse (ea66e3) — 5/3/2011 @ 6:01 pm

  191. @Milhouse, Why don’t you tell me how invading Iraq and taking out Saddam Husein has made the world a safer place. Second question, who was a greater threat, Saddam Hussein or Osama Bin Laden? Honest answers please.

    Comment by The Emperor (2e3498) — 5/3/2011 @ 6:15 pm

  192. Hussein was definitely the greater risk at the time. And yes, the world is a much safer place with him gone. The only thing hindsight adds to the picture is that we could have afforded to wait a year or two more before taking him out, and concentrated on other priorities first; but we couldn’t have known that at the time. But those other priorities did not include bin Laden. Afghanistan, yes; and perhaps also North Korea.

    Comment by Milhouse (ea66e3) — 5/3/2011 @ 6:18 pm

  193. Emperor,
    You do realize that one of the links in the intelligence chain was from a Tango captured in Iraq, don’t you.

    The links in the information chain came over a period of years, starting in 2003. There was a focus on finding bin Laden continuously since that time, but the information didn’t start to come together, that is, the real name of the courier wasn’t known, until 2006. From 2006 to 2009 they were listening to all their sources waiting to get a handle on him.

    That happened in 2010, and that’s how we got to Sunday’s action.

    It wasn’t that the Obama administration was necessarily looking any harder, but that the previous leads had panned out enough to become actionable.

    Comment by Bob Reed (5f2db5) — 5/3/2011 @ 6:19 pm

  194. @Milhouse, The only thing hindsight adds to the picture is that we could have afforded to wait a year or two more before taking him out, and concentrated on other priorities first

    There are folks on this board who will disagree with you on that point.

    Comment by The Emperor (8048de) — 5/3/2011 @ 6:36 pm

  195. Maybe; who, for instance?

    Comment by Milhouse (ea66e3) — 5/3/2011 @ 6:37 pm

  196. @Bob Reed.
    You do realize that one of the links in the intelligence chain was from a Tango captured in Iraq, don’t you.

    Interesting. Can you back up that assertion please?

    Comment by The Emperor (cf8c10) — 5/3/2011 @ 6:42 pm

  197. Señor Reed – Chimperor has a mouthful of Barcky, and worn out knee pads.

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 5/3/2011 @ 6:49 pm

  198. http://gatewaypundit.rightnetwork.com/2011/05/more-bad-news-for-dems-it-was-a-captured-terrorist-in-iraq-gave-info-on-bin-laden/

    Comment by narciso (79ddc3) — 5/3/2011 @ 6:52 pm

  199. @Milhouse. Well the general consensus among the Republican debaters here is that going to Iraq then was the best thing to do. Even on hindsight. No regrets. But you seem to be saying that on hindsight it might not have been the smart thing to do then, maybe some time later. Am I reading you right?

    Comment by The Emperor (b22054) — 5/3/2011 @ 6:52 pm

  200. @JD, run along home, adults are talking..

    Comment by The Emperor (ad203a) — 5/3/2011 @ 6:55 pm

  201. When Chimperor says adult, she means idiot.

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 5/3/2011 @ 6:59 pm

  202. @Milhouse, Why don’t you tell me how invading Iraq and taking out Saddam Husein has made the world a safer place. Second question, who was a greater threat, Saddam Hussein or Osama Bin Laden? Honest answers please.

    Comment by The Emperor — 5/3/2011 @ 6:15 pm

    You mean the man who openly defied a total of (IIRC) seventeen UN resolutions? The man who personally ordered weapons of mass destruction used on his own people, then later hid them when we went looking for them? The one who sent his personal enemies to death by giant plastic shredders, feet first, and who encouraged and helped his sons maintain their rape rooms? The one who had a long history of aiding and abetting anti-American terrorists? You mean that Saddam Hussein?

    Why, only a child would think the world would be a safer place with him out of power. That’s why the Iraqis convicted and executed him. Because they weren’t adults. Right?

    Comment by no one you know (fd287d) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:03 pm

  203. I assume the 6:55 post makes complete sense to the person who wrote it, but I seriously doubt anybody else can figure out what that pile of mismatched words and garbled thought is about, or what point its author was trying to make.

    Comment by elissa (37707f) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:07 pm

  204. Nook – play nice ;-)

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:08 pm

  205. Nook = noyk. Damn autocorrect.

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:10 pm

  206. Sure Emperor,

    It’s long, but all explained pretty well in this telegraph piece.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/al-qaeda/8489866/WikiLeaks-Bin-Ladens-courier-trained-911-hijack-team.html

    The Money Quote:

    The file suggests that the courier’s identity was provided to the US by another key source, the al-Qaida facilitator Hassan Ghul, who was captured in Iraq in 2004 and interrogated by the CIA. Ghul was never sent to Guantanamo but was believed to have been taken to a prison in Pakistan.
    He told the Americans that al-Kuwaiti travelled with bin Laden. The file states:
    “Al-Kuwaiti was seen in Tora Bora and it is possible al-Kuwaiti was one of the individuals [al-Qahtani] reported accompanying UBL [bin Laden] in Tora Bora prior to UBL’s disappearance.”

    The picture that emerges from al-Qahtani’s Guantanamo file supports statements given in the last 24 hours by US officials, who named Ghul as the “linchpin” in the intelligence operation to find bin Laden.

    And HuffPo talks about the breakthrough where they finally “fixed” the courier’s position.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/02/osama-bin-laden-dead-one-phone-call_n_856674.html

    Finally, here’s Mr. Obama’s CIA director Leon Panetta admitting that prior interrogations provided important parts of the picture.

    http://dailycaller.com/2011/05/03/torturous-evasions/

    Money?

    CIA Director Leon Panetta admitted to Brian Williams on Tuesday night’s broadcast of NBC Nightly News that waterboarding detainees contributed information that was ultimately used to locate Osama bin Laden. Panetta, however, said that “whether we would have gotten the same information through other approaches I think is always going to be an open question.”

    There you go.

    Comment by Bob Reed (5f2db5) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:10 pm

  207. noyk, all these points as bad as they may seem does not answer the question. Surely there are countries where dictators are doing worse things to their people. They are still in power. Saddam did not attack America. Osama Bin Laden did. How can you make the argument that removing Saddam was more important than hunting and killing OBL, the very man who showed a willingness and capability of hurting Americans. I still don’t see how it adds up in your calculation. What am I missing here. Would you say this if Bush had killed Osama Bin Laden?

    Comment by The Emperor (ad203a) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:15 pm

  208. Why don’t you tell me how invading Iraq and taking out Saddam Husein has made the world a safer place. Second question, who was a greater threat, Saddam Hussein or Osama Bin Laden? Honest answers please.

    How about admitting we wouldn’t have found Osama Bin Laden if Bush hadn’t gone to war with Iraq? The notion that Iraq was totally unrelated to the war on terror is proven false.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:16 pm

  209. Nook – play nice ;-)

    Comment by JD — 5/3/2011 @ 7:08 pm

    Yeesh. Emperor likely has no idea how much restraint is required to give a civil reply to that –let’s face it — utter nonsense.

    Comment by no one you know (fd287d) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:16 pm

  210. Add to noyk’s list;

    The man who’s stooges dared to illuminate my two-ship with the SAM radar, on mumerous locations, in direct defiance of the UN imposed no-fly zone restrictions.

    We pretty much knew they’d never actuall launch, but the sound of the alarm still tightened one’s sphincter a bit…

    Saddam was flotsam on the sea of humanity. And after toppling him, while the struggle was bittter, it allowed us to slaughter scads of AQ fighter that streamed to the reagion over years; and led to the capture of folks like Ghul as well.

    Given the choice, I’d always choose fighting them over there rather than over here…

    Comment by Bob Reed (5f2db5) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:18 pm

  211. Also, emperor, Libya gave up their nuclear weapons program thanks to the Iraq war. Invading Iraq saved America from having to deal with a nuclear weapons program, even though that program wasn’t in Iraq. It also saved us from a dictator hell bent on attacking Americans, who was ready to renew his weapons programs as soon as he could.

    Of course, Obama has invaded Libya, so it’s hard to see how his shills have still attack the Iraq justifications.

    Emperor: we never would have gotten Osama Bin Laden without invading Iraq.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:18 pm

  212. How can you make the argument that removing Saddam was more important than hunting and killing OBL…

    Multi-tasking… The Taliban had been routed by the time we took down Saddam. And while it may be a valid assertion that more bodies may have facilitated ObL’s capture, that’s only stipulating that would be possible if he was in Afghanistan.

    Which he wasn’t. He was either in the Kush, or as knowledgable folks have said he sojurned in Iran for a while.

    Would you have suggested we go into Iran to get him? Somehow I think not, but I’ll not put words into your mouth.

    Would you say this if Bush had killed Osama Bin Laden?

    Indoubitably.

    Comment by Bob Reed (5f2db5) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:24 pm

  213. Yeesh. Emperor likely has no idea how much restraint is required to give a civil reply to that –let’s face it — utter nonsense.

    Comment by no one you know

    It truly is nonsense.

    The US Air Force and Navy were enforcing UN’s will on Iraq, after a cease fire due to the first gulf war.

    While we did that, Saddam fired upon our aircraft.

    He was constantly pushing against his containment. He cheated the oil for food program, and he tried to kill those military containing him. It is not debatable that simply ignoring him would lead to WMD use, since that’s what Saddam did so many times.

    so what’s emperor’s argument? That we should let someone shoot at our people, or that we should flee?

    We tried limited engagement, waiting for the Middle East to strike us, all through the 1990s, and that didn’t work out. 9/11 proved we have to stop people like Saddam from holding any power.

    As a side benefit, it turns out that invading Iraq was key to finding Osama Bin Laden. Though many on the left continue to pretend there was no relevance of Iraq in the war on terror, this relies on nonsense about how one kind of terrorist can’t work with another kind because of distinctions in religion. That’s just wrong.

    Emperor is trying very, very hard to deny bush any credit at all for his role in our triumph, and has repeatedly laughed about the electoral gains he hopes to see democrats get.

    He should consider that the majority of Americans think Bush deserves some credit. It’s time for us to all unite when it comes to national security. In many ways, Obama’s choices led to a great success. In many ways, Bush’s choices did as well. There never was a partisan difference on whether or not to hunt down Osama Bin Laden. It’s a petty thing to try to score points with.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:25 pm

  214. Would you say this if Bush had killed Osama Bin Laden?

    Comment by The Emperor — 5/3/2011 @ 7:15 pm

    What does that mean, coming as it did, a nonsequitur at the very end of your comment? Pls clarify. Because it’s sure sounding as though you think my opinion of Saddam Hussein (or Osama bin Laden, FTM) would change depending on whether there is a Republican or Democrat in the WH.

    Perhaps I should turn the question around on you, since you’re the one who thinks such a distinction is important. If Obama had gone to war with Iraq based on the intel and UN resolutions and Congressional approval that we had, would that have been OK, and why or why not?

    Comment by no one you know (fd287d) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:25 pm

  215. How can you make the argument that removing Saddam was more important than hunting and killing OBL, the very man who showed a willingness and capability of hurting Americans.

    By 2003, bin Laden no longer had that capability. Dead or hiding, he was out of the game, courtesy of George W. Bush. Saddam Hussein, meanwhile, not only had also shown a willingness and capability to hurt Americans and other Westerners, but was still very much a player. Even without WMD he had to be taken out; the prospect of his arming himself with WMD just made it more urgent that it be done right then, rather than a few years down the track.

    Comment by Milhouse (ea66e3) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:26 pm

  216. A possible successor to Bin Laden, the Egyptian Seif Al Adel, did live in Iran for a time, at least
    when he was organizing the 2003-2004 bombing campaign
    in Saudi Arabia

    Comment by narciso (79ddc3) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:27 pm

  217. After the thoughtful and kind responses,which were much more than it deserved, Chimperor showed how unserious she is with her response at #207.

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:28 pm

  218. @Bob Reed. Of course I agree that the capture of OBL was a result of years of intelligence work that spans even before the Bush era. That is not in question. My point is that somewhere along the line Bush lost focus and the quest for OBL went cold. He started it but he did not finish it. This glory should have gone to him. Iraq was a distraction. A costly one.

    Comment by The Emperor (ab2326) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:29 pm

  219. The Emperor, your point is devoid of any evidence. The idea that the Iraq operation was a “distraction” fatuous.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:34 pm

  220. Don’t forget what David Kay wrote in his report:

    I must say, I actually think what we learned during the inspections made Iraq a more dangerous place potentially than in fact we thought it was even before the war.

    and

    and
    A lot of material went to Syria before the war, including some components of Saddam’s WMD program. Precisely what went to Syria, and what has happened to it, is a major issue that needs to be resolved.

    This is what we learned after the invasion. The situation, overall, was worse than we had thought. We had been underestimating the threat. However, the one aspect of the threat which we overestimated was the time aspect: how far along were the weapon programs. That was what made it so urgent to invade right then, before taking care of other things; and in hindsight we turned out to have had more time than we feared.

    Comment by Milhouse (ea66e3) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:36 pm

  221. Oops. When nesting blockquote tags, must keep count. That’s the second time this week I’ve done it. And my previous comment is still stuck in the spam filter.

    Comment by Milhouse (ea66e3) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:37 pm

  222. An example of the fatuous nature of your claims, The Emperor, can be found in this ridiculous sentence: “How can you make the argument that removing Saddam was more important than hunting and killing OBL, the very man who showed a willingness and capability of hurting Americans.

    Afghanistan, which was harboring OBL, was the target of the Bush administration in the Fall of 2001. Iraq was invaded a year and a half later. So addressing the sanctuary of OBL was done first.

    Yet, you write such silly brazenly false tripe and assert that dealing with Iraq was deemed more important than OBL. Try learning to read a calendar.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:39 pm

  223. My point is that somewhere along the line Bush lost focus and the quest for OBL went cold.

    Do you have any evidence for that?

    Iraq was a distraction.

    So you will just stubbornly ignore the fact our big break came from OIF, where we captured the man who named the courier? Not the nickname, but the real name, which we used to track him down, and then found Osama Bin Laden?

    You now act like you wish Bush got more glory, but your first comment on this topic was glee at the election prospects for democrats. You first comment.

    And again, the freedom of tens of millions of people is more important than revenge against one old man who had no power and led nothing. His day was past. Perhaps it’s a special revenge that Osama Bin Laden watched the US military tear his organization to shreds, years ago? Perhaps it’s a special revenge that all the promised follow up attacks didn’t occur, and Osama saw that, impotent, as we hunted him down?

    Revenge is not satisfying. We can’t bring back those thousands lost with the righteous death of this bastard. Nothing we do will mend that. It’s great he’s dead, but it’s not enough.

    But it sparked a movement to give democracy a fighting chance in Iraq. Maybe, if Obama succeeds in Afghanistan or Libya or Egypt or Syria, a fighting chance there too. It’s a long, hard effort, and I don’t hold it against him that he’s been unable to match Bush’s success in Iraq, which too was extremely hard.

    That you continue to pretend we accomplished nothing in Iraq is sad. Freedom to vote for millions of people.

    Your pettiness is unpatriotic.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:39 pm

  224. Afghanistan, which was harboring OBL, was the target of the Bush administration in the Fall of 2001. Iraq was invaded a year and a half later. So addressing the sanctuary of OBL was done first.

    Great point, SPQR. I guess it’s also a rather obvious point, but it is still great. It’s quite clear we did all we could to find OBL and dismantle Al Qaida, but priority one was protecting Americans.

    Milhouse, your comments are always easy to read, so I wouldn’t sweat the html errors.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:41 pm

  225. Ok, so the new meme is that Bush went to Iraq to get the guy who will lead him to OBL, right. Not the WMDs nor the fact that he felt Hussein posed an imminent threat to freedom. I like how you guys are changing your story and shifting the goal post on an argument you seem to have lost. Just accept the simple fact that it was a complete blunder. Trying to paint a pig wont make it a dove. A pig is a pig. Final thought, was AQ active in Iraq before the fall of Saddam? Was he in cahoots with them? Honest and informed answers please.

    Comment by The Emperor (fc801d) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:46 pm

  226. The Emperor, strawman. No one said that.

    And your attempts to move goalposts, and abandon the silly crap you’ve written are noted.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:47 pm

  227. Comment by The Emperor — 5/3/2011 @ 7:46 pm

    While I appreciate the difficulty of replying to several people at once, perhaps you might consider answering some of our (as yet unanswered) questions before we continue answering yours.

    Comment by no one you know (fd287d) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:49 pm

  228. Ansar al Islam, idiot. Chimperor is just spitting out all of the BS leftist memes from the last 8 years.

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:50 pm

  229. The issue is why didnt he use those systems to focus on capturing the man who attacked and killed 3000 Americans on American soil?

    Emperor is actually claiming the Bush administration wasn’t making any effort to find Osama Bin Laden. That is some hard core partisanship, right there.

    Emperor, you want to politicize this? Try taking that nastiness to the American people, who know we tried very hard, using everything at our disposal, to relentlessly find Osama Bin Laden. They won’t appreciate being lied to.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:51 pm

  230. Emperor,

    My point is that somewhere along the line Bush lost focus and the quest for OBL went cold.

    The telegraph article I linked implies the opposite. When you’re doing all you can, what more can be done?

    The only reason last Sunday’s raid could take place was that the sum total of the intelligence from over the years had finally panned out, leading to the breakthrough in 2010, which led to the SEAL raid.

    Without the intel from prior to 2006, they could have never listened for sign and leads on the courier, Abu Ahmad al-Kuwaiti. An important part of that intel came from an AQ operative who came to Iraq to fight the infidel, and was captured, Ghul. Without any of this information they could have never known exactly who to listen to intercepts for. And without all of that, Mr. Obama could have never enjoyed the privilege and honor of ordering the assasination of bin Laden.

    Bush didn’t “lose focus”; the intel hadn’t panned out to the point where it was actionable…

    Comment by Bob Reed (5f2db5) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:53 pm

  231. WTH? the nazis were not far-right.

    Comment by DohBiden (15aa57) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:54 pm

  232. JD, actually The Emperor is repeating crap that The Emperor has written before – over many years – and had debunked.

    But all is a tabula raza for The Emperor. Its a walking Alzheimers’ commentor.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:56 pm

  233. I get the impression that “The Emperor” is not arguing in good faith…

    Comment by Bob Reed (5f2db5) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:57 pm

  234. Ok, so the new meme is that Bush went to Iraq to get the guy who will lead him to OBL, right.

    Who said that?

    Not the WMDs nor the fact that he felt Hussein posed an imminent threat to freedom.

    Read the AUMF. It lists a variety of reasons.

    Thankfully, in fighting in Iraq, we beat Al Qaida. We found tremendously valuable intel.

    . Trying to paint a pig wont make it a dove. A pig is a pig.

    And the pig’s name is Hassan Ghul. We captured this al qaida man in Iraq, when democrats were screaming it was time to leave. Thank God we didn’t, because it’s quite clear that in his head was the breakthrough that led to Osama Bin Laden.

    AQ active in Iraq before the fall of Saddam? Was he in cahoots with them? Honest and informed answers please.

    So anyone who supports the war in Iraq is dishonest and ignorant? Is that what you’re saying? You seem to be setting the goalposts in a lot of various locations. You wouldn’t have to do that if you were honest and informed.

    It sounds like you don’t even know what al qaida is. Al Qaida is/was a network. It connected different organizations. Yes, the Iraqi Intelligence Service used this network. That’s proven. What you meant to say, but were too stupid to say, was that Saddam did not orchestrate the 9/11 attacks. As far as we know, he had nothing to do with it. That doesn’t mean taking Saddam down didn’t help us take down the network of terrorists. Indeed, it obviously did.

    In fact, it was how we found Osama Bin Laden. That was hardly the point of the invasion. It doesn’t rank in the top 100 benefits.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:58 pm

  235. And since I’m not familiar with the local cadre, and behind the curve of the discussion, I’ll bid all you folks a good night.

    My Regards

    Comment by Bob Reed (5f2db5) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:58 pm

  236. @SPQR, what silly crap are you referring to? Your baseless dismissals won’t suffice.

    @Dustin, by his own admission, Bush said finding OBL was not his priority. And his actions by going to Iraq proved it. Don’t take it out on me, refer your anger to the man himself.

    Comment by The Emperor (ab2326) — 5/3/2011 @ 7:59 pm

  237. The Emperor, the dismissals are not baseless while your accusations about Bush are literally devoid of any base. Certainly no evidence at all.

    Meanwhile, your moronic claims are easily debunked with a f’king calendar.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 5/3/2011 @ 8:01 pm

  238. When you’re doing all you can, what more can be done?

    Bob Reed gets it, Emperor. Why don’t you? We didn’t even know if Osama Bin Laden was still alive. And for god’s sake, killing one man is hardly sufficient to protect Americans.

    If you can name a single time we had a lead on Osama Bin Laden and didn’t follow it, please do so now. Wikileaks is exposing a lot of the hidden information about this, so if that is out there, perhaps you can find it.

    Of course, you won’t. We followed every lead we could. We intercepted millions of calls, interrogated everyone we could, and when we finally learned the name Al Kuwaiti, we followed practically everyone he had ever met until we found him and Osama Bin Laden.

    You act like this was some kind of sad indictment on Bush’s decision not to do his job. That is really taking hackery to a new level.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/3/2011 @ 8:02 pm

  239. @Dustin, by his own admission, Bush said finding OBL was not his priority.

    He directed his administration to follow every lead they had to find Osama Bin Laden. That’s a fact.

    Another fact is that Osama Bin Laden was just one person, and his organization was already shredded. President Bush’s top priority was preventing another 9/11, of course. Another was democracy in the middle east, which is greatly related to our security.

    You claim Bush said he wasn’t trying to find Osama Bin Laden, but you know you’re distorting what he said. I have a higher priority on breathing than eating, but I do both.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/3/2011 @ 8:05 pm

  240. The Emperor, am still waiting for you to answer a number of our questions.

    Comment by no one you know (fd287d) — 5/3/2011 @ 8:05 pm

  241. While The Emperor in that juvenile manner keeps repeating one quote of George W. Bush with respect to OBL, The Emperor ignores that the Bush administration did hard and important work in dismantling the financial money laundering network that Al Queda had set up ( and which was in fact the largest contribution of OBL himself to terrorism – together with the establishment of safe havens in Afghanistan ).

    Democrat monkey poo throwers ignore that very hard, unglamorous work because it requires deep thought – something their bumper sticker mentality can’t follow. It also does not fit the Democrat lie that the Bush administration was bad at foreign relations – breaking down terrorist financial networks required an immense amount of international cooperation. Cooperation that the Obama administration has been screwing up.

    The other very important work that the Bush administration did was build a historic level of cooperation with India. This was important because it broke down a key element of the Pakistani government’s hold on US policy – that India had been Soviet aligned for decades. Once India was brought into a pro-Western foreign policy stance, Pakistan could be strong armed into more cooperation with the US. Notice how much less cooperation with get from Pakistan since Obama has damaged the US-India relationship? Its more than coincidence.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 5/3/2011 @ 8:07 pm

  242. Does The Emperor understand any of this? No, it takes more understanding of issues than reading “Imagine World Peace” on the back of a Volvo.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 5/3/2011 @ 8:09 pm

  243. __________________________________________

    Ok, so the new meme is that Bush went to Iraq to get the guy who will lead him to OBL, right.

    Who the hell said that? It’s a given that Bush invaded Iraq solely and purely because of the Butcher of Baghdad and his refusal to abide by demands and requirements under the auspices of the US, NATO and the UN.

    Meanwhile, it’s rather interesting that a variety of usual-suspects of the left have been oddly quiet regarding Obama’s dealings with Libya, certainly singling out Obama (the two-faced dude that he is) saying he didn’t need to bend over backwards to please the Congress (or others) before authorizing military actions.

    As for goalposts, however they’re moved, I just don’t want you or anyone else falling for the notion that liberal sentiment imbues one with wonderful humaneness and compassion. It doesn’t. And proof of that is the sickening spectacle of “progressives” being more indignant and resentful about — as one example — George W Bush and the US military instead of the guy who fed human beings through plastic shredders, referring to Saddam Hussein.

    Comment by Mark (411533) — 5/3/2011 @ 8:10 pm

  244. The other very important work that the Bush administration did was build a historic level of cooperation with India…Once India was brought into a pro-Western foreign policy stance, Pakistan could be strong armed into more cooperation with the US. Notice how much less cooperation with get from Pakistan since Obama has damaged the US-India relationship? Its more than coincidence.

    Comment by SPQR — 5/3/2011 @ 8:07 pm

    Had forgotten about this connection — good point.

    Comment by no one you know (fd287d) — 5/3/2011 @ 8:10 pm

  245. Honestly, why are any of us taking Emperor seriously? He started saying he relished the political benefits for his democrat party, and then he steadily ramped up his rhetoric until he made people mad. He came here angry with us, and obviously he thinks slandering the USA is a great way to ‘win’.

    As best as I can tell, Emperor is showing that he holds us in very high regard for our values and honesty, and our interest in freedom. You can tell by how he tries to exploit those values to troll.

    It must be very sad to be this creep. When the USA has a triumph in finding Osama Bin Laden, Emperor wants to explain how terrible George Bush was. Reelected President George Bush, whom most Americans polls say deserves some of the credit for finding Osama Bin Laden.

    That BDS will never go away, I imagine. Like Osama bin Laden, Emperor will angrily yet impotently wander around his little pointless life.

    The real joy in this story is that, in the end, Osama Bin Laden’s death didn’t change anything. He wanted all this power, but he never got any, beyond killing innocent people before we focused on shutting him down.

    Obama inherited Osama Bin Laden as a problem, just as Bush inherited it from Clinton. All of them had programs to find him, because finding him was important to all sane people. We all won this one. It’s not a partisan issue.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/3/2011 @ 8:12 pm

  246. Ok I get it, Bush went to Iraq to attract AQ that wasn’t there before then to fight US forces there and in the process, nab the man who would give us info on th whereabouts of OBL. Hmmmm.. SPQR, lets talk calender, there was no AQ in Iraq b4 we went there. And it is possible that AQ had the luxury of coming to fight us in Iraq because we were no longer pursuing them actively where they were, Afghanistan.

    Comment by The Emperor (fc801d) — 5/3/2011 @ 8:12 pm

  247. The other very important work that the Bush administration did was build a historic level of cooperation with India. This was important because it broke down a key element of the Pakistani government’s hold on US policy – that India had been Soviet aligned for decades. Once India was brought into a pro-Western foreign policy stance, Pakistan could be strong armed into more cooperation with the US. Notice how much less cooperation with get from Pakistan since Obama has damaged the US-India relationship? Its more than coincidence.

    This…

    Comment by Bob Reed (5f2db5) — 5/3/2011 @ 8:14 pm

  248. The Emperor, why is it that making up crap that no one said makes you think you have some grand rebuttal?

    Calendar is Afghanistan in fall of ’01. Iraq in late spring ’03. But you claim that Bush thought Iraq more important than OBL. A flat out lie. Now you are caught in yet another in a long series of stupidity – so you try a non sequitur.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 5/3/2011 @ 8:17 pm

  249. I’ve seen the back windows of Subaru station wagons covered in a mishmash of bumper stickers that were more coherent than you, The Emperor.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 5/3/2011 @ 8:18 pm

  250. there was no AQ in Iraq b4 we went there.

    Lie

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 5/3/2011 @ 8:19 pm

  251. AQ had the luxury of coming to fight us in Iraq because we were no longer pursuing them actively where they were, Afghanistan.

    Lie

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 5/3/2011 @ 8:20 pm

  252. SPQR @ 241

    Great big picture points. Not only with India, which I think is huge for America’s future, but also the nitty gritty of how the USA and the rest of the civilized world took apart terror financing.

    We truly made it to the point where finding Osama Bin Laden was simply a psychological benefit. He was otherwise irrelevant. Revenge doesn’t really help us much, though I won’t discount it completely. ousting a dictator like Saddam, replaced with a messy, clumsy democracy, is a great thing.

    Yes, Emperor, we know, that’s something democrats don’t get credit for, so you have to insist it’s worthless. You would probably even undo it if you could. Maybe you should reevaluate your life, and why you are even a democrat in the first place. That’s more than just a team, right? At some point, you cared about people and ideas somehow, and thus you can be overjoyed at the great success of Iraq, as hard and unsure that fight was at times (Thanks largely to the American left, often trying to set timelines and even pull out). Imagine if Senator Obama had gotten his way, and we pulled out of Irag in 2004.

    Well, I bet Osama Bin Laden, roasting in hell, sure wishes that had happened.

    Face it: democrats were wrong about Iraq. We could win, even though they so often said we couldn’t, every single step of the way. It could help the war on terror, with terrorists flooding the country to meet us, die, or even shed lots of valuable information, such as where Osama Bin Laden is.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/3/2011 @ 8:20 pm

  253. Bush went to Iraq to attract AQ that wasn’t there before then to fight US forces there and in the process, nab the man who would give us info on th whereabouts of OBL.

    you know, it’s quite telling how you rewrite what people are saying. You do so in a way that proves you understand our argument, and even understand that it is the winning argument, so your best hack response requires you to break that argument into something that wasn’t said at all.

    Thanks, Emperor. You couldn’t lose an argument more clearly, except of course, for simply admitting you were mistaken, like a gentleman would.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/3/2011 @ 8:23 pm

  254. Dustin, the Democrats have been lying about the important, unglamorous nitty gritty work of counter-terrorism that the Bush administration embarked upon.

    Lie after lie after lie.

    And they do so shamelessly. The Emperor may be just too stupid to know how vapid the BS talking points are. But likely, its intentional dishonesty.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 5/3/2011 @ 8:23 pm

  255. Meanwhile, all this nonsense distracts from fascinating developments. Canada’s recent election moves Canada dramatically to the right politically, even as Obama discredits the Left in the US.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 5/3/2011 @ 8:25 pm

  256. ==reading “Imagine World Peace” on the back of a Volvo.==

    And tragically, SPQR, those same Volvos often also have a “Baby on Board” sign on the window. So we know that a poor innocent little Libette is helplessly getting its mind shaped and warped inside that car.

    Comment by elissa (37707f) — 5/3/2011 @ 8:27 pm

  257. @SPQR, Dustin has said on this thread or so that he thinks Saddam hussein posed a greater threat than OBL. Take your anger with him.

    Comment by The Emperor (e0eb89) — 5/3/2011 @ 8:29 pm

  258. So we know that a poor innocent little Libette is helplessly getting its mind shaped and warped inside that car.

    Comment by elissa — 5/3/2011 @ 8:27 pm

    being forced to listen to NPR! (*Psycho violin shrieks*)

    SPQR, saw a car yesterday AM with a slew of those bumper stickers on it. IIRC it was actually a Subaru. Heh.

    Comment by no one you know (fd287d) — 5/3/2011 @ 8:31 pm

  259. SPQR, Dustin has said on this thread or so that he thinks Saddam hussein posed a greater threat than OBL. Take your anger with him.

    A) SPQR and I do not always agree, and it’s not a big deal. I can’t think of a single person here I agree with consistently. We are adults. You assume disagreement or different priorities = anger because that’s how you deal with people you disagree with. Your conduct in this thread shows you’re desperately angry.

    B) I think finding Osama Bin Laden was very important. I’m so happy we did. I just think protecting the USA from another 9/11, or free elections for tens of millions of people, are more important. I think SPQR probably agrees completely.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/3/2011 @ 8:34 pm

  260. I think Emperor doesn’t intend to do as NOYK asks and answer some questions.

    He seems to be repeatedly taking something someone said and screwing it up into the worst possible version of it. He’s made that same play several times in a row now. Obviously, that’s not the move of a person who is trying to win an argument. It’s the move of someone who wants to make people mad.

    Comment by Dustin (c16eca) — 5/3/2011 @ 8:36 pm

  261. Well, bottom line, OBL attacked America, killed 3000 people in cold blood. Ten years later justice came to him. The m*ther F*#ker is dead and right now feeding fishes under the belly of the deep sea. A victory for America. Cheers y’all. Long live the US of A!!

    Comment by The Emperor (f2e1ab) — 5/3/2011 @ 8:43 pm

  262. Well, there you go folks. Back a lefty into a corner and responds with sarcastic snark at a level that defies Dante.

    Comment by Ag80 (6134b7) — 5/3/2011 @ 9:17 pm

  263. This is a comment I’ve tried to post several times this evening, and it keeps getting caught in the filter. I think I finally figured out why. I’ve changed the one word that I think was the cause of my problem, and now we’ll see whether I was right.

    the general consensus among the Republican debaters here is that going to Iraq then was the best thing to do. Even on hindsight. No regrets. But you seem to be saying that on hindsight it might not have been the smart thing to do then, maybe some time later. Am I reading you right?

    Iraq was a situation that had to be dealt with, sooner or later. The 11-Sep-2001 attacks brought home to us that we couldn’t keep juggling it forever and hoping it wouldn’t explode. In hindsight, knowing what we think we do now about the state of Hussein’s weapons development programs, it appears that we could have waited a few more years before dealing with it. Knowing what we think we do now, there were more urgent priorities to pursue. However, finding bin Laden was not one of them. Even putting the most optimistic cast on what we now know about the situation in Iraq, it was still more urgent than finding bin Laden.

    At the time, though, everyone both in and out of Iraq believed that WMD were already being manufactured or, if we were lucky, on the brink of being manufactured. Indeed, it seems that even Hussein himself may have believed that. In that situation it would have been criminally reckless of the President to have dambled that the situation wasn’t as urgent as it appeared. The only responsible thing to do was to invade as soon as possible; and indeed the months Bush spent faffing around with the UN in order to soothe Tony Blair’s sensibilities were a huge mistake that allowed Hussein time to set up the insurgency that followed his fall.

    Comment by Milhouse (ea66e3) — 5/3/2011 @ 9:18 pm

  264. And there’s a comment I keep trying to post here, but it keeps getting caught in the filter, and for the life of me I can’t figure out why.

    Comment by Milhouse (ea66e3) — 5/3/2011 @ 9:23 pm

  265. Lovey – Just for you, Iowahawk did a piece on Bin Laden’s death and America’s pride.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/3/2011 @ 9:25 pm

  266. The comment I refer to in #264 is the one that finally got through, ironically as #263. I’ve been trying to post that comment all evening, and it kept getting caught. I finally wrote to Patterico, and he seems to have freed up one of the many attempts I made. The word I incorrectly thought was holding me up was “gambled”, so I changed the first letter to a “d”, but that didn’t work. I can’t see anything else that might have been the bad word, though.

    Comment by Milhouse (ea66e3) — 5/3/2011 @ 9:43 pm

  267. “House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) said she called former President George W. Bush on Tuesday to congratulate him on the capture and killing of Osama bin Laden. Following a classified briefing on the operation to take down bin Laden, Pelosi told reporters that she called the former president earlier in the day to ‘congratulate him and thank him for the leadership role he had played in this quest over the years.’”

    So Nancy Pelosi has more class than The Emperor.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 5/4/2011 @ 7:43 am

  268. @Milhouse, you know, I attend to agree with you. As of that time Saddam Hussein possessing WMDs posed a greater danger than any lone terrorist group. As of then invading Iraq to stop him from developing that capability was the most responsible thing to do as of then. But this blunder could have been avoided if Bush had allowed the UN inspectors to conclude their search for the supposed WMDs then. But thats a discussion for another day. But you are right, if indeed Saddam posed a real threat to life as we know it, stopping him would have been the right thing to do.

    Comment by The Emperor (a8559f) — 5/4/2011 @ 4:29 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.6929 secs.