White House story of bin Laden's death keeps changing

[Richard Cranium]

Here's the facts as they appear now: There was no 40 minute firefight, Bin Laden was unarmed, he did not use his wife as a shield, and the compound didn't cost a million dollars. Add to that, there's no body, nor will Obama show us a picture of his body. We're all glad that Raghead #1 is dead & congrats are well deserved, but the White House spin after the raid seems like it's nothing but a major screw up. Why? 





The White House account of the U.S. raid that killed Osama bin Laden has been changing almost daily since the last shot was fired, and the administration's claim that it was a capture-or-kill mission has come into question as new details emerge.
Administration officials repeatedly described the operation as a "continuous" firefight that lasted 40 minutes from the moment the Navy SEALs landed in bin Laden's compound in Pakistan until they left with his dead body.

"They were engaged in a firefight throughout the operations," White House spokesman Jay Carney said Tuesday. "The resistance was consistent from the moment they landed until the end of the operation."

A senior Pentagon official backed up the claim, saying, "For most of the period, there was a firefight."

Officials later revealed that the SEALs killed a man who fired at them when they landed in the compound, but they did not take any additional fire for the remainder of the operation.

When the Americans moved into bin Laden's house, they began clearing it floor by floor. They killed one man whom they believed was preparing to fire a weapon and killed another who lunged at them.

That's not how CIA Director Leon Panetta described it. He told PBS on Tuesday, "There were some firefights that were going on as these guys were making their way up the staircase of that compound."

When the SEALs got to the third floor of the compound, they found bin Laden unarmed, contrary to what U.S. counterterrorism chief John Brennan had said less than 24 hours after the raid.

"[Bin Laden] was engaged in a firefight with those that entered the area of the house he was in," Brennan said. He also said bin Laden used one of his wives as a shield -- but Carney later corrected that report, saying the woman had lunged at the SEALs on her own accord.

By midweek, the administration gave up trying to get the narrative right and instead clammed up, just as the United Nations' top human-rights official began questioning the legality of the mission.

"There is simply no question that this operation was lawful," Carney said. "The team had the authority to kill Osama bin Laden unless he offered to surrender."

The White House has offered no evidence that bin Laden or the three other unarmed people killed in the raid were given a chance to surrender, though there's no indication that the American public, relieved that the decade-long hunt for the al Qaeda leader, is concerned about it.

Obama will meet with members of the SEALs team that carried out the mission during a visit to Fort Campbell, Ky., on Friday.

U.S. law permits American forces to enter another country and destroy a lawful target such as bin Laden, as long as they don't inflict civilian casualties. There's some confusion, however, over whether a high-level target who has been indicted for war crimes -- as bin Laden was -- should be treated as a criminal suspect, according to military law experts.

Carney refused to answer further questions on Thursday regarding the administration's inconsistencies, saying his answers could endanger national security -- just in case the military wants to carry out the exact same operation somewhere else.





http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/2011/05/white-house-story-bin-ladens-death-keeps-changing

[greasyspider]

They brought him to GITMO, thats why there are no pics of his body. I'm sure pics of his body will be "leaked" in a few weeks, after we get down waterboarding him.  But for now, there are no pics of his dead body because there is no dead body.  The SEALs shot an unarmed man? They most certainly took him alive, think of the intelligence value of having him alive while the world thinks he's dead....we can start picking off the terrorists one by one before they even know whats happening.

[DC_1]

They brought him to GITMO, thats why there are no pics of his body. I'm sure pics of his body will be "leaked" in a few weeks, after we get down waterboarding him.  But for now, there are no pics of his dead body because there is no dead body.  The SEALs shot an unarmed man? They most certainly took him alive, think of the intelligence value of having him alive while the world thinks he's dead....we can start picking off the terrorists one by one before they even know whats happening.

Interesting theory.....I still think he is dead.

[BigBlackDodge]

They brought him to GITMO, thats why there are no pics of his body. I'm sure pics of his body will be "leaked" in a few weeks, after we get down waterboarding him.  But for now, there are no pics of his dead body because there is no dead body.  The SEALs shot an unarmed man? They most certainly took him alive, think of the intelligence value of having him alive while the world thinks he's dead....we can start picking off the terrorists one by one before they even know whats happening.

Evidence of this?


BBD

[1BAD68]

"the United Nations' top human-rights official began questioning the legality of the mission"


In the words of our greatest General...
"We're not just going to shoot the bastards, we're going to cut out their living guts and use them to grease the treads of our tanks"
General George S. Patton

[Mike DC]

  

Maybe he's dead or maybe he isn't.  Maybe he died last week.  Maybe he died in 2002.  Maybe he's locked up & being waterboarded right now.  Maybe he'll be killed in prison soon.  I dunno. 

But the bottom line is I'm confident he's out of commission permanently.  After what has gone on during the last week, he's gotta be either dead or else he's secured under lock & key somewhere at a US-controlled location.  Our side could never risk the P.R. disaster of declaring him dead to the world and then having him show up alive later.  He'd just LOVE to humiliate us like that if he had the chance.   
     

[BrianShaughnessy]

Al-Qaida confirms Osama bin Laden's death, vows retaliation

http://www.freep.com/article/20110506/NEWS15/110506017/Al-Qaida-confirms-Osama-bin-Laden-s-death-vows-retaliation?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

Feel free to confirm this thru your own favorite news and / or disinformation sources.

[bull]

They brought him to GITMO, thats why there are no pics of his body. I'm sure pics of his body will be "leaked" in a few weeks, after we get down waterboarding him.  But for now, there are no pics of his dead body because there is no dead body.  The SEALs shot an unarmed man? They most certainly took him alive, think of the intelligence value of having him alive while the world thinks he's dead....we can start picking off the terrorists one by one before they even know whats happening.

Evidence of this?

BBD

Evidence? If you're going to discuss the concept of evidence where's the evidence proving otherwise? Or the presence of any evidence other than a wrecked helicopter and three dead Arab guys? Which says nothing. We either believe the White House or we don't.

[stripedelete]

Even a  bunch of 10 year olds can agree on what story they are going to tell their parents...

It seems this administration is trying to have thier gold medal "bronzed" .

and Joe Bidan hasn't even opened his mouth.

[AKcharger]

It's just CRAZY! 

[squeakfinder]

    And the lattest;


         "Obama shot Osama and WE got the 72 versions."

[last426]

but the White House spin after the raid seems like it's nothing but a major screw up. Why?

Because Obama is doing the right thing by covering for the seals.  It's their stories that keep changing and Obama is doing what any decent boss will do, covering their exaggerating butts.  Kim

[Brock Lee]

I say it was a mission to execute. They took out anyone they felt could be a threat and asked questions later. They wounded anyone that was not an immediate threat, but was in the way. When Osama was in their sights, they took him out.

[Tilar]

"the United Nations' top human-rights official began questioning the legality of the mission"

As far as I'm concerned, if you take the opinion of the United Nations and you add a quarter to it, you still couldn't buy a cup of coffee anywhere that it isnt already free.

[John_Kunkel]

but the White House spin after the raid seems like it's nothing but a major screw up. Why? 

Kinda like Dubya's "Mission Accomplished"?

[stripedelete]

I say it was a mission to execute. They took out anyone they felt could be a threat and asked questions later. They wounded anyone that was not an immediate threat, but was in the way. When Osama was in their sights, they took him out.

Right!  So why don't they say it and leave it there?

[bull]

but the White House spin after the raid seems like it's nothing but a major screw up. Why?

Because Obama is doing the right thing by covering for the seals.  It's their stories that keep changing and Obama is doing what any decent boss will do, covering their exaggerating butts.  Kim

Right. Politicians never obfuscate, exaggerate or flat out lie to your face. Navy Seals, on the other hand, are notorious for that.
                                                   

[ITSA426]

I guess you had to be there to know for sure, and even then your mind would doubt what you thought you saw.

[Old Moparz]

My money says he's dead & that in some form of afterlife, Elvis is beating the shit out of him with leftover Michael Jackson parts.

[Silver R/T]

Does it really matter, one extra muslim, dead or alive.

[TK73]

Does it really matter, one extra muslim, dead or alive.

Did you intend to say "extreme" muslim or are you really Spokanatarded?

[1970Moparmann]

I love to hear the story keep changing.  It shows how our administration is. Keep changing it, it's getting really funny.

[Brock Lee]

I say it was a mission to execute. They took out anyone they felt could be a threat and asked questions later. They wounded anyone that was not an immediate threat, but was in the way. When Osama was in their sights, they took him out.

Right!  So why don't they say it and leave it there?

Because there are people in this country that will cry outrage because he wasn't put on trial. That we acted no better than the terrorists by executing him. The thing is, they will never have the approval of 100% of the people. I think they are trying to candy coat it to appeal to as many as possible. There may also be some laws broken too and they need to be careful. They should just disclose it all and let the chips fall where they may. I am proud of what they accomplished.

[stripedelete]

I say it was a mission to execute. They took out anyone they felt could be a threat and asked questions later. They wounded anyone that was not an immediate threat, but was in the way. When Osama was in their sights, they took him out.

Right!  So why don't they say it and leave it there?

Because there are people in this country that will cry outrage because he wasn't put on trial. That we acted no better than the terrorists by executing him. The thing is, they will never have the approval of 100% of the people. I think they are trying to candy coat it to appeal to as many as possible. There may also be some laws broken too and they need to be careful. They should just disclose it all and let the chips fall where they may. I am proud of what they accomplished.

Agreed.   We are on the same page.  But I believe the "law" they are braking is "never explain a judgement call".  It is what it is -  move on.  For the first time this administration gets to wear "big boy pants" and they come off like like Bidens in charge of spin.

[BigBlackDodge]

I love to hear the story keep changing.  It shows how our administration is. Keep changing it, it's getting really funny.

Not much different than the previous administration....



BBD