Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
May 07, 2011

"They Should Have Known" Discrepancies

Many in the U.S. blame Pakistan for not knowing about the alleged Bin Laden safe house in Abbottabad.

No one in the U.S. blames Pakistan for not knowing about the alleged CIA safe house in Abbottabad.

Many in the U.S. blame the Pakistani soldiers working at the Pakistani Military Academy in Abbottabad for not knowing about the nearby alleged Bin Laden safe house.

No one in the U.S. blames the U.S. soldiers working at the Pakistani Military Academy in Abbottabad for not knowing about the nearby alleged Bin Laden safe house.

Posted by b on May 7, 2011 at 18:09 UTC | Permalink


Excellent. Bartender, dust off the good stuff for my friend, b.

Posted by: Eureka Springs | May 7 2011 18:27 utc | 1

Yet another ObL fake video. Where is the quality control?

Posted by: hans | May 7 2011 18:56 utc | 2

I don't want to say the obvious that of course everyone did know to a certain degree, except perhaps OBL himself. It was either a betrayal or a setup for a previous death.

There is a lot which has not come out yet. The CIA safe house could not have remained unknown for six months. The story of shooting dead OBL, thinking he was armed, is certainly false. The SEALs must have been incompetent, but then the same team killed that British woman by mistake.

I would have thought they were quite relaxed, after the suppressing the only person shooting. Must have been orders to kill, even in cold blood. Even after surrender.

A forty-minute raid should have generated a reaction from the Military Academy, but it didn't.

Only the US cares about this. OBL knew what was coming, sooner or later. I would think, like Saddam, that he went to his death with dignity, and was probably shot down in cold blood.

The excuses for the SEALs are not very good. They could have captured him but didn't. No doubt that was their orders. But they don't deserve praise. Rather they were a lynch mob.

Posted by: alexno | May 7 2011 19:41 utc | 3

I've always thought that the point of eliminating OBL was to declare victory and leave Afghanistan. Many have disputed this.

I don't know why. The death of Bin Ladin is going to have a great effect on the determination of the US to continue in Afghanistan. Al-Qa'ida was the main point. And if the main chief is not there, it is going to be difficult to revive them as a bogey. The Taliban as such are not very interesting to the US.

I would have thought, therefore, that the death of OBL would lead to a downgrading of the war in Afghanistan. If this does not happen, my first thought would be that the military need to keep their budget.

Posted by: alexno | May 7 2011 21:02 utc | 4

I see no signs that the US are going to declare victory in Afghanistan before 2014, when apparently all Afghanis will turn into Americans and watch baseball (or something).

Posted by: a swedish kind of death | May 7 2011 21:18 utc | 5

I haven't placed any blame for the CIA safe house or for the US soldiers because heretofore I had not known about them.

There are certain compounds in Newport RI that look a lot like pictures of the bin Laden compound. For all I know, they also might be harboring terrorists. I'm not trained to detect such matters.

And "Pakistan" is not a monolith. Most likely certain elements of the ISI and its military were involved. There's plenty of evidence to support that conclusion.

Posted by: Mercutio | May 7 2011 21:19 utc | 6

I trust the opinion of locals more than anything on offer from U.S. or Pakistani Officials. There was no OBL at that "compound" in Allotabadinfo.

Notice how the reporter tries to reconstitute what the local gentleman said about OBL not being there. He was improvising to temper the man's disconfirming account.

Posted by: Morocco Bama | May 7 2011 21:24 utc | 7

Amazing interview with gvt insider Dr. Steve Pieczenik

Posted by: absinthe | May 7 2011 23:16 utc | 8

@ absinthe #8

If you read the commentary at that link, it appears that Pieczenik may be too good to be true. That is, the source of all the information about him in the web appears to track back to him. There are spy novels @ Amazon which list him as author. Maybe that's all.

Posted by: smoke | May 8 2011 2:30 utc | 9

I live in a US town with military bases on three sides. If the military or govt actually knows who lives in every house and apartment within 1 mile of any base, I'd be surprised. There may be real estate databases they can scan for names, but a wanted criminal isn't likely to be putting his/her name on a lease or deed. And I doubt the bases bother with such an exercise.

Meanwhile, as one who assumed OBL was dead, or perhaps retired to a safe place, with full knowledge to the relevant agencies, I am still looking for a good explanation of what actually occurred a week ago, and wondering if my assumption was mistaken.

As far as what seems verifiable from local Abbottabad reports, it was certainly a very black op: no electricity, new moon, stealth helicopters. Locals heard hovering helicopter and later explosion. A couple neighbors on roofs reported seeing 3 helicopters and may have seen dark figures running around the compound. Cars were heard or seen racing to the location after the explosion. Initially, Pakistan media reported that a training helicopter from the Military Academy had crashed. After BO's announcement, the media reported OBL killed by US military. Parts of a helicopter have been found at the scene.

Are there any other aspects of the raid which seem to be corroborated by non-intel sources?

As for helicopter route, FB Ali believes that 4 helicopters flew from Bagram to the Pakistani base in Ghazi. There are already US helicopters and forces based at Ghazi, who arrived months ago to help with flood relief. A raid was launched from Ghazi with 2 copters, and when one was disabled a replacement went in to pick up the passengers.

Posted by: smoke | May 8 2011 2:58 utc | 10

no, in towns like that you know about foreigners. there may be no neighbourhoods in the US, in conservative places there certainly are. Everybody knew everything. you would know in a US gated city and this was the equivalent of a gated city.

I can recall some years ago when some Al Queida no two was killed his relatives accused that that was the price for keeping a distance from Bin Laden.

Actually he was more valuable alive and completely watched than dead.
The interesting questions are - why now? And who made this video the administration is afraid of, otherwise they would not have to backtrack so many stories.

Posted by: somebody | May 8 2011 6:34 utc | 11

What the fuck is it with all this 'compound' bullshit? Almost everyone in central Asia that doesn't live in an apartment has concrete walls around their property. Cheaper and more durable than white picket fences. My mother-in-law has a compound.

Posted by: Biklett | May 8 2011 7:04 utc | 12

I find this more interesting">">

and this

Posted by: somebody | May 8 2011 8:27 utc | 13

It is still unknown when OBL died, but it is now clear that he is indeed dead: Statement of the Leadership Council of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan Regarding the Martyrdom of the Great Martyr Sheik Osama bin Laden.

Posted by: b | May 8 2011 9:34 utc | 14

smoke @10

Meanwhile, as one who assumed OBL was dead, or perhaps retired to a safe place, with full knowledge to the relevant agencies, I am still looking for a good explanation of what actually occurred a week ago

somebody @11

The interesting questions are - why now?

a fairly simple answer:
1) OBL was send in a safe place by Musharraf; where exactly, very few knew, certainly not the Us, who basically had delegated him to deal with the problem
2) the Us is undergoing a major shift in its strategy, gradually shaking itself off from the neocon legacy (especially ground wars in ME / central Asia, and obsession with Israel security)
3) Pakistan is the new center of Us policy now; the Us wants to control its security and military apparatus as they routinely do with all their colonies, west european countries included, which have very little room for independent and unmonitored action; this is needed to arrive at a deal with the Taliban, undisturbed by Pakistan's concerns, that will make the pull-out of Us troops possible (at least, this is what the Us hopes)
4) the hunt for OBL (and the ongoing use of drones) are the unilateral rewriting of Us-Pakistan relations by the new Us administration

conclusion: if Pakistan doesn't react soon, it's toast

alexno @4

I've always thought that the point of eliminating OBL was to declare victory and leave Afghanistan. Many have disputed this.

I agree with that; but it won't happen automatically; the Us only wants to disentagle itself from the ground war, not leave Afghanistan; so they need leverage on Pakistan to gain leverage on Talibans to forge a favorable deal, and then scale down troops (leaving some permanent bases, etc)

Not very easy

Posted by: claudio | May 8 2011 10:41 utc | 15

Not even Charlie Sheen inebriated on a fist full of soma could fail to shoot down a sickly old unarmed man in his pajamas. Not even someone with just a few functioning brain cells could possibly construe this as bravery on the part of the SEALs, much less as winning on the part of the US. Not even the combined visionary prowess of Aldous Huxley and George Orwell could possibly dreamed up such a dystopian nightmare for us -- a place where we are so inebriated on state-sponsored soma that we don't have a clue on how to differentiate bravery from cowardice, much less winning from losing.

How long will it take for the soma to wear off so that we can realized that our perception of the world is the opposite of the actual world around us!

These thoughts of mine were inspired by Chris Hedges' piece that he wrote back in 2010 entitled "2011: A Brave New Dystopia"...

Posted by: Cynthia | May 8 2011 13:45 utc | 16

Oh my, Fox jumped the gun....someone mistimed the scripted coverage. I wonder if they fired the idiot for letting it slip too early?!/megneverlands

Fox News reports OBL death a few days too early According to this Tweeter, she saw the Fox News ticker report that Osama bin-Laden was dead on April 28. So either she got into Twitter and hacked her account to change the date stamp, had a psychic premonition, or this is for real.

Posted by: Morocco Bama | May 8 2011 14:15 utc | 17

The SEALS are cowards and bullies. One of my neighbors is a former SEAL....and he's now a Cop....go figure. He has not one, but three Doberman's....bloodthirsty dogs who lunge at any passerby with snarling growls when he's walking them. He also has another dog, a Cocker Spaniel named, of course, Reagan.

His teenage son is a cocky jackass and one day at the pool, per my wife, the son is goofing off and making things miserable for all the other families there including the very young children whom he is scaring. One of the father's reprimands the adolescent, and this jackass goes running to tell daddy. Daddy comes down to the pool and an argument breaks out between him and the guy who admonished his son. The SEAL starts to verbally and physically threaten the guy, so a woman, who is disturbed by the escalation, and what could become of it, tells the SEAL that if he doesn't back off she will call the police. He gets up in her face and says "go ahead and call the police, Lady....I am the fucking police," and then continues to get in the face of the man who admonished his son. She called the police and they were there within a minute or two, which was remarkable. The reason they got there so soon was when she told them who it was, they knew right away...he has a history of threatening civilians, apparently, and they know he is a loose cannon.

Like I said, SEALS are cowardly bullies.

Posted by: Morocco Bama | May 8 2011 14:30 utc | 18

Attack dogs have their place in life, I'd prefer to blame their handlers.

Posted by: ben | May 8 2011 15:50 utc | 19

Is it just me, or do other MOA readers pull out their tin foil hats when someone links to infowars or rense dot com for any reason? Seriously.... what's next UFO's really captured bin Laden in 1984?

I also find the suggestion the US is planning to pull out of Afghanistan to be dubious. By some reports we are or have built long term infrastructure far beyond what was built in Iraq... larger than Green zone embassy and mega air-bases. All of which would remain if you accept we are not finished manipulating Pakistan alone. Beside that, empire never leaves, until they go bankrupt or get bloody crushed... Certainly seems like the Caspian natural resources have yet to be looted and pipelinistan has yet to be developed... which was and surely still remains the big plan.

Perhaps folks should also consider being a bit more specific about withdraw.... As an anti war advocate who also thinks we should reduce MIC spending by at least 85 percent... withdraw means no troops, no bases, no contractors, very few if any spooks remain. I seriously doubt any withdrawing would reduce our footprint by half, if that.

Posted by: Eureka Springs | May 8 2011 16:08 utc | 20

no reason not to believe the neighbors when they say that they were suspicious of the mysterious inhabitants of "the compound", and believed it must be some drug-lord, or something like that; it sounds quite normal to me, also the fact that no one was keen to discover who he really was (who'd do something like that in today's world?)

Posted by: claudio | May 8 2011 16:17 utc | 21

@20, I don't pay any attention to anything from Rense or Icke, but who in this thread has linked to either?

@21, what are you talking about. In my linked youtube, the Pakistan local was clear that there was no OBL in that house. I won't conflate a Pakistani local with a Western local. The two are not the same, and don't compare.

@19, I can blame both, and the insane System that creates both. It still doesn't preclude what I said, and my statement about their cowardice is not's a fact.

Posted by: Morocco Bama | May 8 2011 16:24 utc | 22

this does not mean anything of course, just fun.

Posted by: somebody | May 8 2011 16:55 utc | 23

Eureka Springs @20 - I agree we must be more precise with our wording

I think the Us wants to withdraw from Afghanistan in the sense that it wants to cease the ground war

it's a return to post-Vietnam doctrine of "no more land wars in Asia", or better: only really easy land wars in the world, like Grenada; then Falklands 1982, Iraq 1991, Kosovo 1999, Afghanistan 2001 was an escalation that convinced the neocons that times were ripe for a change in doctrine ...

Permanent military bases, Cia infiltration of local security, local government's purchase of Us weapons, control of clandestine drug trade, and the general Fmi agenda of looting the country's resources are an entirely different matter; the "empire" will alway try to achieve these until it can

Afghanistan and Pakistan also have, in addition, a strategic interest as far as control of "pipelinistan" is concerned

But when you talk of withdrawal in the Us, the current arm wrestling concerns the ground troops, which not everybody wants out or reduced; Petraeus' assignment at Cia is the signal of ongoing negotiations and maybe settlements

Two important elements that influence the current return to a more traditional war doctrine is that in a land war too large a part of the budget is spent on soldiers (from equipment and training to treatment of casualties and long-term disabilities), whereas the establishment would rather spend on high-tech super-expensive toys;

and the fact that bodybags, even if of mercenaries, speak to a nation's conscience, call for a public debate over means and ends of the military effort, etc: something the establishment needs to avoid at all costs

Posted by: claudio | May 8 2011 17:10 utc | 24

It's my belief that Pakistan is the ultimate target of the occupation in Afghanistan; and the only deal the US wants to make with the Taliban is about how the goal of destabilizing and fracturing Pakistan can be accomplished.

The usual suspects in Washington are looking to get their hands on Pakistan's nuclear deterrent, so they can neutralize it; and they want to lay hands on Gwadar, the port in southern Pakistan, with the huge docking and transshipment machinery, which the Chinese have invested so much time and money in building.

The ultimate goal is to disrupt China's network of energy supply across the globe. If this was done directly, through naked aggression, there would be a big war right away; but this will be done indirectly, after Pakistan is balkanized, and a compliant US puppet is in place.

The endless flight forward into war, accompanied by economic and social unrest at home, will bring repression in greater measure to the US. And the kinds of skills Obama is showing here, indicate that he is just the man to carry this out.

Posted by: Copeland | May 8 2011 17:19 utc | 25

@ claudio 15, 21, 24, earlier thread - Lots of thoughtful, informed analysis. Thanks.

Posted by: smoke | May 8 2011 17:20 utc | 26

My bad, @20. @8 has a link to infowars. I feel the same way. I clicked on that link and saw infowars and clicked off it, immediately.

Posted by: Morocco Bama | May 8 2011 18:50 utc | 27

Calling the Navy Seals bully cowards must come easy to a blowhard like Morocco Bama. I guess venting with a keyboard is good therapy for one so powerless.

Posted by: nighttrain | May 8 2011 19:47 utc | 28

Looking back to Vietnam, the U.S. left that conflict - lock, stock, and barrel - at a time when arguably (not that I believe this) the U.S. and the ARVN had managed to at least stalemate the NVA advances in SVN. The ARVN was able to accomplish this in the final 2 years with virtually no U.S. ground troop assistance and not a whole lot of air assistance. By this accounting SVN and the ARVN (and U.S. interests) was on immeasurably better footing than certainly Afghanistan if not Iraq, but the U.S. for a variety of SIMILAR reasons had lost the POLITICAL will to continue funding the conflict, even on the greatly reduced level of supplying air cover to the ARVN. The U.S. congress simply cut off the funding.
As far as the current wars, we see a similar lack of political will manifesting in the congress, specifically among the republicans, who are beginning to jump ship for both fiscal and counter political reasoning against Obama.
This is not to say that we'll leave Iraq and Afghanistan in total like Vietnam, well, maybe Iraq, but the recent successful whacking of OBL and the general euphoria over drone technology and new surveillance technology will probably convince the doubters that there's been a tectonic change in how occupation can be accomplished technologically, from the relative safety Mama's basement, instead of all those expensive and so yesterday's boots on the ground.
The new shiny object will prevail, and out we come.

Posted by: anna missed | May 8 2011 20:06 utc | 29

hey, thanks, smoke @26

MoA inspires me to express my thoughts; I've been lurking for years (starting with billmon) before MoA closed; when I saw it was back again, it was as if had found a long-lost friend, and I decided that this time I would have contributed actively to the conversation, and said whatever I was convinced of at the moment, taking the courage to do so, as many had always done, beginning obviously with b

yes, it takes some courage, maybe depending on one's character, and I'm glad I found it; I decided to behave as I would in a real bar, with real people, mostly friends, each one talking - at various levels of competence and passion - of politics

a big thank to b, because the constructive, warm mood of this bar is of course due to him in first place

Posted by: claudio | May 8 2011 22:53 utc | 30

Calling the Navy Seals bully cowards must come easy to a blowhard like Morocco Bama. I guess venting with a keyboard is good therapy for one so powerless.

It's not a matter of easy versus hard, it's just stating a simple fact. You, and the SEALS themselves, may perceive the SEALS as something else because that is what you have been taught and indoctrinated to think, but in actuality, the SEALS are just an "elite" force of bully coward jack boot thugs carrying out orders from their Corporate Overlords. They are glorified mercenaries for Corporate/Plutocratic Tyranny.

Also, I'm not venting. There's no emotion on my part about this. It's an objective and measured observation.

And finally, "powerless" is the greatest compliment you could have given me. That is precisely the be "powerless." If you are "powerless" in this System, meaning you lack any status within it, and therefore any influence within it, it means that you are not feeding this insane System, and it is not feeding you, both literally and metaphorically. That's how you destroy the insane System. Not with Bombs and Bullets, but with becoming "powerless" within it.

Posted by: Morocco Bama | May 9 2011 11:10 utc | 31


I didn't watch the interview with Obama on 60 minutes last night, but when I reviewed the transcript this AM I had a thought. Obama pointed out how the U.S.'s moral superiority was shown by the care with which bin Laden's body had been disposed of, after he had been captured, and then summarily executed with gunshots to the head.

KROFT: Was it your decision to bury him at sea?

PRESIDENT OBAMA: It was a joint decision. We thought it was important to think through ahead of time how we would dispose of the body if he were killed in the compound. And I think that what we tried to do was, consulting with experts in Islamic law and ritual, to find something that was appropriate that was respectful of the body.

Frankly we took more care on this than, obviously, bin Laden took when he killed 3,000 people. He didn’t have much regard for how they were treated and desecrated. But that, again, is somethin’ that makes us different. And I think we handled it appropriately.

I recognize that hindsight is always 20/20, but notice how Obama is claimin' clear foresight here. The option of takin' bin Laden prisoner had been rejected. The plan for tossin' his corpse in the ocean was already worked out. Anyone who doubts whether bin Laden deserved his fate "needs to have his head examined." Given all this planning for likely eventualities, why couldn't they have planned to shoot him in the heart a few times, once they'd grabbed him, instead of in the head? The post-mortem pictures would have been much more presentable. It would have been much more feasible for bin Laden's head to have been examined. It's too late now, of course, but they ought to keep this in mind for the next Emmanuel Goldstein.

Posted by: mistah charley, ph.d. | May 9 2011 12:40 utc | 32

I'm gonna side with MB on the 'courage' factor...

It's far more courageous to go against the majority and think for yourself than it is to spread death in a fire fight. Soldiering is courageous in much the same way moutaineering and river rafting is courageous; you put yourself in an extremely demanding situation where fucking-up can cost huge – maybe even taking your life. Isn't soldiering just a modern risk sport? The players will tell you they're doing it for god, mom and country, what they leave out is the adrenaline rush a guy gets when he's killing and blowing up shit. I remember playing such games when I was a child, my imagination overloaded with of C-4, blasting caps and a wooden weapon with a clip full of armor piercing rounds... Violence as play. Or is it that play becomes violence?

As an adult, I recognize that soldiering solves about as many problems as mountaineering does, which is nil. And it has far worse consequences... at least when mountaineers lay siege to a mountain the worst problem the locals probably have to deal with are drunken excess by the climbers and some trash left behind. Not so with empire's rootin', tootin', shootin' adrenaline junkies. The latter group doesn't just trash the place, they're doing it with both god and their leaders approval. Speaking of leaders, how many stars and bars ended-up doin' time over the crap that happened at Abu Ghraib?

The real heros are like the soldiers in the video MB linked to in a previous thread (damnit, I can't find it right now, I should have bookmarked it) who realizes he's been used, can admit he was willing to be used, and wants to inform others so they won't make such a stupid choice. War is stupid in our electronic age.


Posted by: DaveS | May 9 2011 14:02 utc | 33

Listening for the brief times I could manage it last night, when Obama described anyone who opposed summary judgement and execution of OBL as somene who "needs to have his head examined," I said to the TV, hey, right here, I need to have my head examined. However, in truth, I believe Obama et al ought to have their heads, actions, morals, etc., examined.

It takes a Constitutional law assistant professor and Nobel Peace laureate to say what Obama said, to do what he did, eh?

BTW, in the little I could find about how his students regarded him as a law professor, I gather he was well liked.... I wonder if he discussed his current views of the unitary executive with unlimited powers....

Posted by: jawbone | May 9 2011 16:28 utc | 34

obama, on 60 minutes:

As nervous as I was about this whole process, the one thing I didn't lose sleep over was the possibility of taking bin Laden out. Justice was done. And I think that anyone who would question that the perpetrator of mass murder on American soil didn't deserve what he got needs to have their head examined.

abd-al-bari atwan, chief editor of al-quds al-arabi online:

President Obama`s permit to his forces to kill an unarmed man reveals that he is not a head of a democratic state that respects human rights and that complies with the rule of law and fair judiciary. This shows him as though he was a man leading a gang that takes killing, kidnapping, and terrorism as a profession. A state of law that rules wisely arrests criminals, terrorists, and out-laws and brings them to a fair trial. This is what the Allies did at Nuremburg Tribunals and applied to diehard Nazi who caused the death of more than 40 million people during World War II. We do not think that shaykh Bin-Ladin was more dangerous than those Nazi. Was he treated in that brutal way because he was an Arab and Muslim?


We might ask ourselves how we would be reacting if Iraqi commandos landed at George W. Bush’s compound, assassinated him, and dumped his body in the Atlantic. Uncontroversially, his crimes vastly exceed bin Laden’s, and he is not a “suspect” but uncontroversially the “decider” who gave the orders to commit the “supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole” (quoting the Nuremberg Tribunal) for which Nazi criminals were hanged: the hundreds of thousands of deaths, millions of refugees, destruction of much of the country, the bitter sectarian conflict that has now spread to the rest of the region.

There’s more to say about [Cuban airline bomber Orlando] Bosch, who just died peacefully in Florida, including reference to the “Bush doctrine” that societies that harbor terrorists are as guilty as the terrorists themselves and should be treated accordingly. No one seemed to notice that Bush was calling for invasion and destruction of the U.S. and murder of its criminal president.

Same with the name, Operation Geronimo. The imperial mentality is so profound, throughout western society, that no one can perceive that they are glorifying bin Laden by identifying him with courageous resistance against genocidal invaders. It’s like naming our murder weapons after victims of our crimes: Apache, Tomahawk… It’s as if the Luftwaffe were to call its fighter planes “Jew” and “Gypsy.”

There is much more to say, but even the most obvious and elementary facts should provide us with a good deal to think about.

Posted by: b real | May 9 2011 17:18 utc | 35

@b real

yes, there's a profound disconnect, a schizophrenia in all this; all that you said applies to Israel, too; "double standards" doesn't convey the idea; maybe it's the destiny of all "elected" races, people, nations, or any other collective identity, as soon as they come in possession of powerful enough means of destruction

Posted by: claudio | May 9 2011 18:25 utc | 36

@mistah charlie #32

Exactly, bingo. They obviously had the choice of where to shoot, since they shot the wife in the leg. So a single shot to the heart would have done the job just fine.

The line about the head being blown off, the images too gruesome to show, the instant DNA result, and the burial at sea (how far away was the nearest sea in any case?) all stink to the heavens. However you want to think about it, there are lies being told in this saga somewhere.

Posted by: bea | May 9 2011 21:01 utc | 37

a thought: does the Us consider "normal" that neighbors didn't identify the Cia "safe house" near OBL's?

Posted by: claudio | May 9 2011 21:56 utc | 38

@claudio - 99% or more don't know there was a CIA safe house in Abbottabad. and they probably never will.

Posted by: Susan | May 9 2011 22:21 utc | 39

If you don't buy into the official narrative, efforts are already underway to paint you as wacky, fringe and unreasonable. You'll want to get on board with the program if you don't want to get tarred as "one of THOSE types."

We don't need facts. We have a sloppy-ass narrative. If a sloppy-ass narrative was good enough to push through anything we wanted ten years ago, it's good enough for us to get what we want now. Auditions are already being held for a new face of evil, so just don't make any waves and everything will be status quo shortly. Honestly, you people act like this is the first time you've been through one of these bumps in the script. We have ALWAYS been at war with whatever the new guy's name turns out to be.

Posted by: Monolycus | May 10 2011 3:03 utc | 40

#31 very good reply Morroco Bama, well said. Reminds of me of early Christian dissident Jewish view of the Roman Empire. Cheers

Posted by: nighttrain | May 11 2011 0:43 utc | 41

Monolycus is right. And yet even young children are beginning to point fingers at the fraudulent facade that is the official version. On some level, people are supposed to wonder if their wits are failing them, as another wave of disinformation overwhelms the sense of credulity. Stories that are as thinly, and as ineptly strung together, as those in the mainstream press, become like assaults on reason itself. Before we know it, the official narratives are looking more like the last stages in a totalitarian transformation, where people are simply relieved to accept history, when it is styled as something as crude and simplistic as the bin Laden hit.

Posted by: Copeland | May 11 2011 5:31 utc | 42

And yet even young children are beginning to point fingers at the fraudulent facade that is the official version

My questions about the OBL home video:

Is it possible to find out from Al Jazeera when they last screened that doc about OBL that is playing on the TV? And what doc is it?

The OBL in the video changes channels to Obama making a speech. Can the speech and the OBL doc running together on different channels be placed in time?

Posted by: ahji | May 11 2011 7:46 utc | 43

The comments to this entry are closed.