Nearly ten years after the name Osama Bin Laden was transmitted through the global media, and his photo stretched wide over television screens and labeled the face of extreme Islamic terrorism, his international exploits have finally come to an end. Thanks to almost a decade of intelligence operations, research, and detective work on the part of the American intelligence community, he has been tracked to Pakistan, where it is said he was likely in hiding for more than five years. Thanks to a crack Navy SEAL team, he has been located and killed. Thanks to President Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and a dozen military and intelligence personnel looking on, directing the team's every move, Osama Bin Laden's fate was sealed, pun very much intended. And, thanks to the brilliant strategic minds of the decision-making intelligence officials, there is no way of ever actually proving to the general public that anything involving Bin Laden or a SEAL team ever in reality took place. Let me say that once more, there is NO way of EVER actually proving to the general public that ANYTHING involving Bin Laden or a SEAL team EVER in reality took place. Now, in order to prevent discredit to whatever I may call my current reputation, I will state that this post is not in any way an attempt to perpetuate what most people would label a 'conspiracy theory'. The purpose of this post is not to divine what the government may or may not have done, but rather to point out the frustrating fact that the amount of information given to the American people is sufficient only to render divination the sole viable option to discover the truth of what they have been told.
But, you say, it was reported on the news. Both CNN and FOX carried the same story without a single discrepancy in the details of their accounts. Osama Bin Laden was tracked down, and killed, what possible evidence does anyone have to the contrary? I would pose the question in reverse, what possible evidence does anyone have that what was reported happened at all? Unfortunately the answer to both of these colossally important questions is: none. To make more sense of this seemingly insensible idea, let us imagine for the moment that this Bin Laden incident is the subject of a courtroom trial. We, the general public are represented by the jury, while the United States government, along with the mainstream media are represented by the prosecution, since they have indicated that the events of May the second occurred just as they reported them. The defense in this case must of necessity be non-existent, since to date there has not been a single individual who has openly questioned, or has been allowed to openly question the validity of the information regarding the strike on Bin Laden. We as the jury will examine the claims made by the prosecution and determine the quality of the evidence presented in their favor. It will be readily accepted that our object is not to determine whether or not the events of May the second in fact took place, but more importantly to our interests, whether the evidence presented to the general population is such that it removes all reasonable doubt.
First, let us consider the initial claim as it came in. CNN reported that Osama Bin Laden had been located and killed in the city of Abbottabad, Pakistan. They reported that it was done under a Navy SEALs operation and that they had confirmed through DNA tests that it was in fact Bin Laden. There were also reports of 'death photos' that were in possession of the United States, and word was pending on whether or not those would be released. My first reaction to the 'death photos' issue was indifference, since I assumed that the US was in custody of the body, the death having been from a gunshot wound, rather than some sort of explosive, or other method that would ruin identifying evidence. There would be no reason to see photos if they had the body. The only problem was, they no longer had the body. The very next thing I heard reported was that Osama Bin Laden had been buried at sea. Two very strange things occurred to me as I heard that piece of information. First, the rapid pace of it all. Not ten hours after the killshot, before US forces even transported the body into international waters, it was dumped overboard. Second, the reason the government gave for treating the body this way was that it had to do with some sort of 'Islamic tradition.'
Beginning with the issue of timing, questioning forensics labs all over the world, you would find that they all give the same time estimate regarding identification through DNA testing. Subject to the quality of the DNA, it can take anywhere from one week to six for initial results, even longer for confirmation. For our purposes let us assume that the US forces had on their aircraft carrier, from whence the body was disposed of, a team of forensic specialists with their own makeshift lab to perform the necessary DNA tests that were reported to have taken place. Let us also assume that because the death was from a gunshot, that the quality of the DNA used to identify Osama Bin Laden was optimal. Assuming all of that, the minimum time estimate for the top forensic labs in the world is five to ten days, and all that before the results can be confirmed. Even with the best forensic specialists in the world, how could these tests be done AND CONFIRMED in ten hours?
Now let us consider the reason given for burial at sea. There is an inherent problem with the United States behaving in any way that adheres to Islamic tradition; much more when the actions are for the man most wanted by the US government, the man who allegedly orchestrated the most deadly terrorist attacks to ever occur on US soil. It is beyond difficult to imagine the intelligence officials deciding in their minds that the best way to handle the remains of their number one terrorist should be with the utmost respect to his religion. They certainly did not have a problem hanging Saddam Hussein. It is even more difficult to imagine this decision being made by anyone who had family members or friends who died in the North or South towers, or Building seven of the World Trade Center on 9/11. To sum up this point, we will return to our courtroom analogy. Aside from the near absurd nature of the actions taken by the US in dealing with Osama Bin Laden's body, what evidence has been presented to the general public to give any certainty at all to what reportedly took place. Allow me to state here that neither the death photos, nor the results from the DNA identification tests were in fact released or made public by the government. The reason being of course, national security. I will revisit this point later. What evidence does the prosecution have that proves or even lends credibility to their case? So far, we have neither a body, photos, nor any certified DNA test results. All we have is the word of the government, and the media to whom it reports.
It became clear to me very quickly after hearing that the US military had buried Osama Bin Laden at sea, just how important those death photos now were. If released, they could be at least examined and verified by professionals who are not in the employ of the US government, thereby lessening the impact the lack of evidence produced by Bin Laden's body would have on the story's credibility. A few short days later, word came from the Obama administration that the photos would not be released. This came as far less a surprise to me than did the news about the burial. The point that gave me trouble was what brings me to the second issue surrounding the events of May the second, the reasons. Officials in the military stated that the death photos would not be released, and further SHOULD not be released at any time in the future, as it could lead to escalated hatred toward America and its citizens, threatening national security. It seems strange that the US government would consider the release of the death photos as more inflammatory to terrorists than the act of killing their leader. In our courtroom case, the government's reasoning would equate to the prosecution making their claim without providing any evidence whatsoever to the jury for consideration. When questioned about their lack of evidence, they explain that showing the jury proof of their actions would be too dangerous to the jury members themselves, and that keeping such proof concealed supercedes in importance the necessity to determine the truth of the very events in question.
Just two weeks after the Bin Laden incident, the Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates was quoted by CNN as saying that the American people should stop talking about the events of May second, including the SEAL team, the operation, and the photos altogether, that this too was endangering national security. Again, in court, this would be the same as the prosecution, after producing no evidence to substantiate their claim, refusing to answer their lack of evidence, and further petitioning the court to no longer discuss the issue and move on to other business.
The question now is, why does any of this even matter? So what if the government has given the people nothing but their word to go by? So what if there have been no witnesses, no testimonies other than those of the officials, which are vague at best? So what if we don't know why nothing has changed in Iraq or Afghanistan as a result of Bin Laden's death? The illustration of the courtroom is cute and entertaining, but I only use it to highlight the fact that the actions taken by the government and media in reporting this event which is monumental in recent history are of such a ridiculous nature that they would not be tolerated in a court of law.
I am not so concerned with the question of what really happened on May the second, but instead how we as a people have been trained by those who are in the seats of power to accept without question, heavy, world-altering claims without any evidence to substantiate them.
I'm not saying that US forces never found and killed Osama Bin Laden, nor am I saying that the United States government is working to cover anything up. I am only saying that based on the bits and pieces of information that have been presented to the American people, and furthermore how readily the American people have accepted those broken facts as truth, can you see just how easily it could be?
