It was originally said that getting Osama bin Laden was the tough part. But the days following the announcement by President Barack Obama are not proving to be a cakewalk due to controversies about whether to release a photo of the dead bin Laden, doubts about whether bin Laden was actually killed being stirred up by ratings seeking talk show hosts, partisans who want to cut Obama down from his suddenly bigger size — and the fact that the administration’s first version of events said Obama was in a firefight but it is now saying he was unarmed. And now the latest splash of gasoline that is being thrown on the fire is this:
Al Arabiya News, citing “senior Pakistan security forces” report that Osama bin Laden’s daughter is claiming bin Laden was killed in a virtual execution. This claim will be likely used as a battering ram against Obama and his administration by those outside and inside the U.S. who seek to use parts of the bin Laden death to create issues for their own differing political gains.
This much is known agreed upon: bin Laden was unarmed. The details are what some of Obama’s international and domestic critics and foes will differ on and likely emit in way that can boost their own international or domestic agendas. Here are the relevant parts of the piece:
Senior Pakistani security officials said Osama bin Laden’s daughter had confirmed her father was captured alive and shot dead by the US Special Forces during the first few minutes of the operation carried out at the huge compound in Bilal Town, Abbottabad.
This means the emerging “deathers” on talk radio, on the Internet and on social media such as Twitter will have a harder time with their growing suggestions that this was all a fake. But just as birthers didn’t want to be bothered with facts and created a new line of attack and alternate reality universe, don’t expect the “deathers” to change their new line of attack. MORE:
A Pakistani security source told Al Arabiya that Bin Laden family members had been transported to Rawalpindi, which is near Islamabad. He added, “They are now under treatment in the military hospital of Rawalpindi, where they have been transported in an helicopter.” A source told Al Arabiya that Bin Laden’s had been injured either in her leg or her shoulder.
He added that the members of the household were children and Bin Laden’s wife, in addition to a Yemeni woman. He added that the woman might be the personal doctor of the family. Bin Laden was known to be afflicted with renal failure.
And here’s the key paragraph that will likely be bouncing around the Middle East:
The daughter has reportedly told her Pakistani investigators that the US forces captured her father alive but shot him dead in front of family members.
According to sources, Bin Laden was staying on the ground floor of the house and was dragged on the floor to the helicopter after being shot dead by US commandos.
Similarly, according to information Pakistani officials collected from detained persons, Osama was neither armed nor did inmates at the compound fire at the US choppers or commandos.
“Not a single bullet was fired from the compound at the US forces and their choppers. Their chopper developed some technical fault and crashed and the wreckage was left on the spot,” a well-informed official explained.
UPDATE: CIA Chief Leon Panetta has offered this explanation:
Asked about the final confrontation with bin Laden, Panetta said: “I don’t think he had a lot of time to say anything.” The CIA chief told PBS NewsHour, “It was a firefight going up that compound. … I think it – this was all split-second action on the part of the SEALs.”
Panetta said that bin Laden made “some threatening moves that were made that clearly represented a clear threat to our guys. And that’s the reason they fired.”
The SEALs were back in the U.S. at Andrews Air Force Base outside Washington for debriefing on the raid, lawmakers said after meeting with Panetta.
Some thoughts:
1. The issue will arise about this report itself: whether it’s valid or disinformation. It’s most likely correct because of the military procedure (see below), White House admission that bin Laden was unarmed, etc. But the motivation of this report is significant.
2. The sourcing is significant: it’s leaked to a newpaper from senior Pakistani security officials. When I was a young reporter several editors noted to me that sources who talk in ticklish situations or who offer key information in big stories often have a motive. It is not to help a reporter or newspaper out.
3. It almost sounds like someone in Pakistan is mad about the publicity coming out about Pakistan either being an untrustworthy and unworthy U.S. ally or one of the most incredibly incompetent nations on the face of the earth when it comes to intelligence gathering — and is seeking to “payback” the United States. Or feels sorry for bin laden.
4. If bin was in effect executed if you slice it all away it really would not be a surprise. Think about it. From the first days after 911 there were news reports suggesting that if Obama was found he would not emerge alive. Years ago some suggested that a)he would not come out alive because that would not be the goal of the operation OR b)if there was a serious attempt to capture him supposedly an aide had standing orders to put a bullet in his head. Reality: perhaps he was sick and just assuming he was untouchable living where he was virtually on a Pakistan military base, an area Americans would NEVER bomb or invade.
Evidence has come out that this was the case: even in 2002 he was hiding in plain view, a fact that again raises eyebrows about the motives of the Pakistani senior official who gave this into. Read this by St. Petersburg Times Staff Reporter Meg Laughlin:
In early February 2002, three of us were stalled in traffic in a small blue Nissan on a tree-lined boulevard outside the Red Mosque in Islamabad: Miami Herald photographer Carl Juste, our driver-translator Bashir and me, a Herald reporter.
I had just spent months in Afghanistan and was relieved to be back in Islamabad, a city where about half the women didn’t cover and Italian restaurants sold red wine with pasta.
Carl and I had been getting calls from editors back in the States telling us not to meet people we didn’t know for interviews because Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl had just been kidnapped in Karachi. So, we were staying close to the hotel, running out only for dinner and supplies. On this trip we were heading to a nearby shop for shampoo and toothpaste.
As the car stopped in traffic, Carl yelled, “Look! There’s Osama bin Laden!”
We couldn’t believe our eyes. There, in front of us was the most wanted man in the world, the face on countless posters offering a reward of $25 million for information on his whereabouts. There was no mistaking him. Towering over the men with him, he was lanky with olive skin and that scraggly long beard, those sad brown eyes and that splayed nose.
The three of us began screaming, “It’s Osama bin Laden! Osama bin Laden!”
He wore a white shalwar kameez, the loose long shirt and pantaloons that are traditional clothing in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and a white turban. He walked slowly with a cane, flanked on each side by a man holding on to him.
They emerged from the wrought-iron gates at the red brick mosque, crossed to the wooded median on the boulevard, took a right turn and walked in our direction.
Carl cursed. He hadn’t brought a camera because it was such a speedy trip and security at our hotel would take forever searching his camera when we returned.
When they called their international editor, he didn’t believe them.
The Los Angeles Times puts the rules under which the Seals operated into perspective:
U.S. commandos who attacked Osama bin Laden’s compound were operating under rules of engagement that all but assured the Al Qaeda leader would be killed, officials have acknowledged, backing away from an initial account that Bin Laden was armed and used a woman as a shield.
After saying Monday that the American operatives who raided the Pakistani compound had orders to capture Bin Laden if he gave himself up, U.S. officials Tuesday added an important qualifier: The assault force was told to accept a surrender only if it could be sure he didn’t have a bomb hidden under his clothing and posed no other danger.
Bin Laden could have surrendered only “if he did not pose any type of threat whatsoever,” White House counter-terrorism chief John Brennan said on Fox television, and if U.S. troops “were confident of that in terms of his not having an IED [improvised explosives device] on his body, his not having some type of hidden weapon or whatever.”
Added a senior congressional aide briefed on the rules of engagement: “He would have had to have been naked for them to allow him to surrender.”
A naked bin Laden? Now that would have been a new level of terrorism.
FOOTNOTE: When it comes to deathers I need to share this.
In the past two days I have driven about 10 hours (this is written from a Starbucks in Santa Nella, CA before I continue my journey.). During this time I have listenened almost exclusively to AM talk radi in a drive from San Diego to Pinole (near San Francisco) and back. 90 percent of the shows have been bigtime conservative radio talk shows or local shows (even the CIA would be unable to find progressive talk, a serious all news station, or NPR on parts of this drive).
It has been STUNNING the number of hosts who are whipping up the suggestion that this didn’t happen, or putting a suspicious tone in their voice saying the administration has not released the photo.
The issue for the administration isn’t just proving bin Laden’s death abroad.
The issue is that there seems to be a segment of the American population now that seem to be wearing comb-overs when if come’s to bin Laden’s death (although Donald Trump so far is not one of them).
Others put their foot down on the suggestions but took care not to offend part of their audience. How can a radio show affording losing all those nuts being sold at CostCo?
By implication these folks are saying that Navy Seals have lied and are in on a CONSPIRACY. It’s a given that they would think Obama is — and that any President that had an “R” as their party affiliation would not be.
All of which suggests that the national unity America saw after 911 will never ever be seen again.
Unless it’s fleeting –– just like the national joy and unity after bin Laden’s capture lasted less than 24 hours before the mega-buck generating controversy media kicked in.
You can’t get ratings saying the Navy Seals, CIA and Obama did a good job on getting Osama forever.
Why not fan the flames by virtual statement, implication or enabling others suggested it was a fake so Obama could get re-elected?
Or at least get really good, “hot” radio and cable talk that gets ’em to return again and again by encouraging callers to question whether bin Laden was really dead or not?
Or why not whip it up because Obama had been praised by many and the goal is to get him out of office in 2012 by hook or crook.
In this case, it’s…by crook.
I still have 7 more hours of talk radio to listen to complete my journey. Please pray for me
[For more blog reaction to this story GO HERE.]
UPDATE 11: It needs to be stressed that the majority of GOP bigwigs are NOT deathers. This is something being developed on the web and on talk radio.
It’s akin to the claims by some websites that Obama really didn’t want to act, the military force him to, or he dithered, or was pushed into the decision. Our politics is all about search and destroy now on both sides but the biggest glaring example of this festering, pus filled tumor is seen now on the far right — something that is sure to turn off independent voters (even some who were former RINOS or George Bush I Republicans) in droves.
As a reminder of the fact that on this issue many Republicans are not joining in the country’s prevailing talk show political culture, here’s the final part of a column by David Frum in the most-read weekly The Week:
Look at President Obama’s face. Tense. Anxious. The face of a man who knows his presidency is riding on events unfolding on the other side of the planet, which he can no longer shape or guide.
He has made a few key decisions. He decided in favor of a commando raid against a bombing attack. He decided to disregard the presence of women and children. He decided that bin Laden should be killed rather than captured for trial.
Beyond that, his role was mostly to accept operational decisions made by appropriate professionals. But of course he is not a professional himself. When the question is posed: four helicopters or five? What kind of explosive charge to use to stun the residents at the start of the raid? What measures to counter-act Pakistani radar? Or even — how much confidence can we have that bin Laden is actually there? To those questions, a president (any president) brings only the instincts, the experience, and the expertise of the career politician. That’s what he is, after all.
There is however one other thing a president brings to any major national decision: the knowledge that if things go wrong, it is he who will receive the blame.
This rule of is not absolute. An especially skillful politician can sometimes escape blame, as Ronald Reagan did after the Marine barracks bombing in Beirut. But the more normal outcome is what happened to Jimmy Carter after the humiliating hostage rescue attempt in Iran or what happened to Bill Clinton after the “Blackhawk Down” disaster in Mogadishu: Ferocious criticism at a minimum, re-election defeat at a maximum. If it’s bad, we blame the man at the top.
And that’s the answer to those who question why Barack Obama should get any credit for a mission that succeeded because of the planning decisions of senior commanders and the courage, skill and marksmanship of Special Forces and CIA professionals whose names we may never know. It’s very rough justice, but that’s the only kind of justice presidents typically can expect.
Go to the link now and read it in full.
Joe Gandelman is a former fulltime journalist who freelanced in India, Spain, Bangladesh and Cypress writing for publications such as the Christian Science Monitor and Newsweek. He also did radio reports from Madrid for NPR’s All Things Considered. He has worked on two U.S. newspapers and quit the news biz in 1990 to go into entertainment. He also has written for The Week and several online publications, did a column for Cagle Cartoons Syndicate and has appeared on CNN.