Bin Laden's burial at sea
- This whole story by the U. S. government, of finding Osama Bin Laden and his death, appear to be starting to unravel.
New U. S. government officials statements, contradict the earlier ones issued.
They first claimed the Navy Seals (usually used for sea landing involved operations [but not this time since the area was in the mountains away from the sea - and there were other special operations forces available to do the same assault and capture in Afghanistan] had first experienced resistance from Osama bin Laden and took a woman shield in the firefight that led to bin Laden's death.
Now the latest version is that Bin Laden was unarmed - and shot twice. That the woman was actually bin Laden's wife, who was shot by the U. S. forces and NOT a shield.
AND that it was the decision of the Seals in the compound, to shoot Bin Laden and NOT the White House!
Now such a valuable target as Bin Laden would normally be captured for his knowledge and not shot. But he was shot twice and mortal wounds with no interest in just wounding him, but definitely to eliminate him. So one has to ask if the Seals who made that decision are going to be demoted and punished for not delivering Bin Laden into custody? Surely his knowledge would be a great resource in the War Against Terror? Instead of ordering a review of why Bin Laden was not captured, instead we heard praise from the White House for the Seals supposedly killing this high resource target instead?
And the burial at sea of Osma Bin Laden's body, is ridiculous just on the face of it. The Obama administration is claiming they had to bury him at sea to conform to Koranic Law! Yet since he was supposedly killed this past week on the land in the mountainous Pakistan - it would make sense to have him taken to Afghanistan military base first and buried there on land, instead of in the Arabian Sea(!!) to conform to Koranic Law (which personally I care little about cleaning and burying bodies, to conform to any religious nonsense, but that is a separate issue!)
IF (and that is a big IF!!!) Osama bin Laden was just shot to death last week, it appears more likely the U. S. government did not want a grave to become some kind of shrine to bin Laden and a focus for Wahabi fanatic supporters. But I suspect that Osama Bin Laden may have been dead for sometime and AFTER the information was obtained from him through drugs and force, then he was killed and possibly placed on ice, to have his actual capture and death not known by his supporters for a time period for advantage by the U. S. government. Thus the reason no body could be delivered, that would allow medical people to test and find that he was indeed frozen and killed much earlier. This is
just a conjecture - but it is a likely one when we hear the U. S. government story about burial at sea and now these new updates that have the original reports contradicted and the whole story begin to unravel.
The U. S. government officials now said it has secured 5 computers and many hard drives filled with information that were obtained by the same Seals operation force that killed Bin Laden. So - they could not capture an unarmed Bin Laden, or shoot him in the arm or leg to incapicitate him to allow capture, but had lots of decision time to gather computer records instead! Perhaps the information is not from only computers, but from Bin Laden who was STRONGLY interrogated.
Does it seem reasonable the White House statement that the Seals on the ground made the decision to shoot Osama Bin Laden, a huge resource target, and not the White House? Would it not seem logical that ALL efforts be made to capture Bin Laden as an important goal, for all the benefits of information and political advantage to demoralize and destroy Al Qaeda? This includes risking the lives of Seals to capture Bin Laden alive, since the goal outweighs personal injury, which is standard military procedure. The loss of Naval Seal personal lives, or serious injury is acceptable damage in military operations for their own forces. Otherwise no military battles would ever take place. And this so called War on Terror is supposedly a war and with battles and casualties - so why give up capturing Bin Laden alive and lose that advantage, if we are to believe the White House versions?
Is the U. S. government that incompetent - that its military forces do not follow orders, on capturing such a key fugitive. Would the $50 million reward not be given to the Seals, or those FINALLY identifying this high walled barbed wire compound, because Bin Laden was not taken into custody? Who benefits from not having a live captive and highly sought criminal - and why are questions that now seem to be raising by critical thinking people, who question the official U. S. government statements around this whole thing - not being discussed more on the corporate owned media?!!
Could it be in part related to bin Laden's past associations with the CIA and the U. S. government in Sudan and Pakistan/Afghanistan in the 1970's to 1990's period?
I just have to start to wonder with the inconsistencies around this remarkable finding of Bin Laden after 12 years searching for him (even before 9/11) and at a site in a
restricted Pakistan military base area, that includes a major component of the Pakistan secret police. The same Bin Laden that partnered in the past with the Taliban, the Pakistan secret police and the U. S. government, that had a high walled barbed wire compound that raised NO interest or suspicion from local Pakistan security forces? I find it strange that with this area being under constant surveillance in the War Against Terror in search of Al Qaeda operatives by BOTH the U. S. spy satellites, military forces and informers and the Pakistan security forces, that no one noticed this complex and asked who resided there?
Many questions remain and the sudden storming of the complex and the implied unpreventable killing of Bin Laden, appear more stories than facts by the U. S. government.