Showing posts with label Osama Bin Laden. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Osama Bin Laden. Show all posts

The Masterful Killing of Osama Bin Laden, Enhanced Interrogation Techniques, and Progressives Skewed Morality

The Navy Seals masterful operational tactics which killed Osama Bin Laden has sparked a debate, yet again, as to whether enhanced interrogation techniques work and are ever morally justifiable under extreme, out of the ordinary circumstances.  Enhanced interrogation techniques aided in finding and killing Osama Bin Laden.  Leon Panetta and previous directors of the CIA have admitted this, that EIT's were one piece of the puzzle in finding Bin Laden. We owe the Navy Seals our gratitude to a mission well done.  They are to be commended for their bravery for a mission accomplished, which was started not too long after September 11, 2001.  Bin Laden got exactly what he deserved.  I hope that those families who lost loved ones on 9/11 may now feel some sense of justice now that Osama is dead and buried at sea. 


Progressives are rehashing the old debate, asking whether it is ever moral to use enhanced interrogation techniques to get our enemy detainees to divulge important information.  Bernard Goldberg asks the question: "Why it is moral to allow the bomb to go off killing hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians?" 

And then goes on to say...

"And exactly what American values are upheld by letting the bomb go off? I can’t think of any.
If liberals want to make the case that waterboarding is immoral no matter how many innocent lives are saved – no matter if the target is a yellow school bus filled with third graders on their way to the museum – then Man Up and make the case, with no apologies."

I don't know how anyone could actually think that it is moral to simply allow millions of innocents to die when there is an avenue we could use in extreme cases to prevent the tragedy from happening.  How is it an American value to vie for our nation to yield in its duty to protect its citizens?  I don't consider America abandoning its responsibility to do its all to protect American citizens from our enemies adhering to American values. 


Progressives like to spout the human rights mantra, have compassion for and are fervent defenders of criminals, scumbags, and terrorists.  For some reason liberals hearts empathize with the scum of the earth even though these people are responsible for the most heinous of crimes and thrive on victimizing ordinary people.  For some reason progressives haven't deemed that the ordinary Joes and Joannes of this world to be worthy of the same compassion as the scumbags of the world.  In addition liberals treat the innocent and most vulnerable of all with utter contempt, like they are non-existent in their alternate quasi-reality. According to liberals the innocent and most vulnerable of all who have not committed any crimes are undeserving of the same rights simply because these babies are unable to speak, are inconvenient, and thus to progressives they are to be brutally destroyed and thrown out like they were pieces of garbage all because progressives are irresponsible, morally bankrupt human beings who prey on the weak. 


  Progressives would have us revert back to a time when so-called civilized people committed barbaric actions.  In First Century BC the Carthaginians were a civilized people who wanted to maintain their opulent lifestyle and would crush the skulls of infants in order to sacrifice them to the pagan Gods as a way of achieving that end and today we have liberals who want to maintain a relatively comfortable lifestyle and in order to do so they murder their offspring.  And the progressives push this demonic agenda on the confused, desperate, and frightened. 


My husband was reminded of and pointed me to this famous passage from The Everlasting Man by G.K. Chesterton: 


In a previous chapter I have hinted at something of the psychology that
lies behind a certain type of religion. There was a tendency in those
hungry for practical results, apart from poetical results, to call upon
spirits of terror and compulsion; to move Acheron in despair of bending
the Gods. There is always a sort of dim idea that these darker powers
will really do things, with no nonsense about it. In the interior
psychology of the Punic peoples this strange sort of pessimistic
practicality had grown to great proportions. In the New Town, which the
Romans called Carthage, as in the parent cities of Phoenicia, the god
who got things done bore the name of Moloch, who was perhaps identical
with the other deity whom we know as Baal, the Lord. The Romans did not
at first quite know what to call him or what to make of him; they had to
go back to the grossest myth of Greek or Roman origins and compare him
to Saturn devouring his children. But the worshippers of Moloch were not
gross or primitive. They were members of a mature and polished
civilisation, abounding in refinements and luxuries; they were probably
far more civilised than the Romans. And Moloch was not a myth; or at any
rate his meal was not a myth. These highly civilised people really met
together to invoke the blessing of heaven on their empire by throwing
hundreds of their infants into a large furnace. We can only realise the
combination by imagining a number of Manchester merchants with
chimney-pot hats and mutton-chop whiskers, going to church every Sunday
at eleven o'clock to see a baby roasted alive.




The first stages of the political or commercial quarrel can be followed
in far too much detail, precisely because it is merely political or
commercial. The Punic Wars looked at one time as if they would never
end; and it is not easy to say when they ever began. The Greeks and the
Sicilians had already been fighting vaguely on the European side against
the African city. Carthage had defeated Greece and conquered Sicily.
Carthage had also planted herself firmly in Spain; and between Spain and
Sicily the Latin city was contained and would have been crushed; if the
Romans had been of the sort to be easily crushed. Yet the interest of
the story really consists in the fact that Rome was crushed. If there
had not been certain moral elements as well as the material elements,
the story would have ended where Carthage certainly thought it had
ended. It is common enough to blame Rome for not making peace. But it
was a true popular instinct that there could be no peace with that sort
of people It is common enough to blame the Roman for his Delenda est
Carthago; Carthage must be destroyed. It is commoner to forget that, to
all appearance, Rome itself was destroyed. The sacred savour that hung
round Rome for ever, it is too often forgotten, clung to her partly
because she had risen suddenly from the dead. Carthage was an
aristocracy, as are most of such mercantile states. The pressure of the
rich on the poor was impersonal as well as irresistible. For such
aristocracies never permit personal government, which is perhaps why
this one was jealous of personal talent. But genius can turn up
anywhere, even in a governing class. As if to make the world's supreme
test as terrible as possible, it was ordained that one of the great
houses of Carthage should produce a man who came out of those gilded
palaces with all the energy and originality of Napoleon coming from
nowhere. At the worst crisis of the war Rome learned that Italy itself,
by a military miracle, was invaded from the north. Hannibal, the Grace
of Baal as his name ran in his own tongue, had dragged a ponderous chain
of armaments over the starry solitudes of the Alps; and pointed
southward to the city which he had been pledged by all his dreadful gods
to destroy.


Hannibal marched down the road to Rome, and the Romans who rushed to war
with him felt as if they were fighting with a magician. Two great armies
sank to right and left of him into the swamps of the Trebia; more and
more were sucked into the horrible whirlpool of Cannae; more and more
went forth only to fall in ruin at his touch. The supreme sign of all
disasters, which is treason, turned tribe after tribe against the
falling cause of Rome, and still the unconquerable enemy rolled nearer
and nearer to the city; and following their great leader the swelling
cosmopolitan army of Carthage passed like a pageant of the whole world;
the elephants shaking the earth like marching mountains and the gigantic
Gauls with their barbaric panoply and the dark Spaniards girt in gold
and the brown Numidians on their unbridled desert horses wheeling and
darting like hawks, and whole mobs of deserters and mercenaries and
miscellaneous peoples; and the grace of Baal went before them.


The Roman augurs and scribes who said in that hour that it brought forth
unearthly prodigies, that a child was born with the head of an elephant
or that stars fell down like hailstones, had a far more philosophical
grasp of what had really happened than the modern historian who can see
nothing in it but a success of strategy concluding a rivalry in
commerce. Something far different was felt at the time and on the spot,
as it is always felt by those who experience a foreign atmosphere
entering their own like a fog or a foul savour. It was no mere military
defeat, it was certainly no mere mercantile rivalry, that filled the
Roman imagination with such hideous omens of nature herself becoming
unnatural. It was Moloch upon the mountain of the Latins, looking with
his appalling face across the plain; it was Baal who trampled the
vineyards with his feet of stone; it was the voice of Tanit the
invisible, behind her trailing veils, whispering of the love that is
more horrible than hate. The burning of the Italian cornfields, the ruin
of the Italian vines, were some thing more than actual; they were
allegorical. They were the destruction of domestic and fruitful things,
the withering of what was human before that inhumanity that is far
beyond the human thing called cruelty. The household gods bowed low in
darkness under their lowly roofs; and above them went the demons upon a
wind from beyond all walls, blowing the trumpet of the Tramontane. The
door of the Alps was broken down; and in no vulgar but a very solemn
sense, it was Hell let loose. The war of the gods and demons seemed
already to have ended; and the gods were dead. The eagles were lost, the
legions were broken; and in Rome nothing remained but honour and the
cold courage of despair.


In the whole world one thing still threatened Carthage, and that was
Carthage. There still remained the inner working of an element strong in
all successful commercial states, and the presence of a spirit that we
know. There was still the solid sense and shrewdness of the men who
manage big enterprises; there was still the advice of the best financial
experts; there was still business government; there was still the broad
and sane outlook of practical men of affairs, and in these things could
the Romans hope. As the war trailed on to what seemed its tragic end,
there grew gradually a faint and strange possibility that even now they
might not hope in vain. The plain business men of Carthage, thinking as
such men do in terms of living and dying races, saw clearly that Rome
was not only dying but dead The war was over; it was obviously hopeless
for the Italian city to resist any longer, and inconceivable that
anybody should resist when it was hopeless. Under these circumstances,
another set of broad, sound business principles remained to be
considered. Wars were waged with money, and consequently cost money;
perhaps they felt in their hearts, as do so many of their kind, that
after all war must be a little wicked because it costs money. The time
had now come for peace; and still more for economy. The messages sent by
Hannibal from time to time asking for reinforcements were a ridiculous
anachronism; there were much more important things to attend to now. It
might be true that some consul or other had made a last dash to the
Metaurus, had killed Hannibal's brother and flung his head, with Latin
fury, into Hannibal's camp; and mad actions of that sort showed how
utterly hopeless the Latins felt about their cause. But even excitable
Latins could not be so mad as to cling to a lost cause for ever. So
argued the best financial experts; and tossed aside more and more
letters, full of rather queer alarmist reports. So argued and acted the
great Carthaginian Empire. That meaningless prejudice, the curse of
commercial states, that stupidity is in some way practical and that
genius is in some way futile, led them to starve and abandon that great
artist in the school of arms, whom the gods had given them in vain.


Why do men entertain this queer idea that what is sordid must always
overthrow what is magnanimous; that there is some dim connection between
brains and brutality, or that it does not matter if a man is dull so
long as he is also mean? Why do they vaguely think of all chivalry as
sentiment and all sentiment as weakness? They do it because they are,
like all men, primarily inspired by religion. For them, as for all men,
the first fact is their notion of the nature of things; their idea about
what world they are living in. And it is their faith that the only
ultimate thing is fear and therefore that the very heart of the world is
evil. They believe that death is stronger than life, and therefore dead
things must be stronger than living things; whether those dead things
are gold and iron and machinery or rocks and rivers and forces of
nature. It may sound fanciful to say that men we meet at tea-tables or
talk to at garden-parties are secretly worshippers of Baal or Moloch.
But this sort of commercial mind has its own cosmic vision and it is the
vision of Carthage. It has in it the brutal blunder that was the ruin of
Carthage. The Punic power fell because there is in this materialism a
mad indifference to real thought. By disbelieving in the soul, it comes
to disbelieving in the mind. Being too practical to be moral, it denies
what every practical soldier calls the moral of an army. It fancies that
money will fight when men will no longer fight. So it was with the Punic
merchant princes. Their religion was a religion of despair, even when
their practical fortunes were hopeful. How could they understand that
the Romans could hope even when their fortunes were hopeless? Their
religion was a religion of force and fear; how could they understand
that men can still despise fear even when they submit to force? Their
philosophy of the world had weariness in its very heart; above all they
were weary of warfare; how should they understand those who still wage
war even when they are weary of it? In a word, how should they
understand the mind of Man, who had so long bowed down before mindless
things, money and brute force and gods who had the hearts of beasts?
They awoke suddenly to the news that the embers they had disdained too
much even to tread out were again breaking everywhere into flames; that
Hasdrubal was defeated, that Hannibal was outnumbered, that Scipio had
carried the war into Spain; that he had carried it into Africa. Before
the very gates of the golden city Hannibal fought his last fight for it
and lost; and Carthage fell as nothing has fallen since Satan. The name
of the New City remains only as a name. There is no stone of it left
upon the sand. Another war was indeed waged before the final
destruction: but the destruction was final. Only men digging in its deep
foundation centuries after found a heap of hundreds of little skeletons,
the holy relics of that religion. For Carthage fell because she was
faithful to her own philosophy and had followed out to its logical
conclusion her own vision of the universe. Moloch had eaten his
children.



The Al Qaeda 'Playbook' Revealed

From ABC News:


"U.S. intelligence is now in possession of a veritable "playbook" of al Qaeda operations -- from potential terror attack targets to information on international safe houses and top commanders -- thanks to the Navy SEAL raid that took down Osama bin Laden Sunday, officials told ABC News today.
"The cache of electronic and handwritten materials obtained by the SEALs includes numerous hallmark al Qaeda plots including attacks on infrastructure targets such as water supply and transportation including rail and air, in what one official described as a "strategic guide for how to attack the U.S." In the past, al Qaeda planned for attacks on water supplies have included an interest in mining dams and in poisoning water supply. Intelligence experts have also have found what appears to be information about safe houses around the world and about al Qaeda leadership."


DNA Evidence Proves Osama Bin Laden is Dead; Plus Video Footage



God Bless our brave Navy Seals who carried out this dangerous mission.  This is an outstanding accomplishment. I hope this brings some sense of justice and closure to those who lost loved ones on 9/11. 

From Haaretz:


"he officials did not immediately say where or how the testing was done but the test explains why Obama was confident to announce to the world on Sunday night that the mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001 had been killed in a U.S. helicopter raid on a mansion near the Pakistani capital Islamabad.
The initial DNA results show a "very confident match" to bin Laden, giving "high confirmation" that it was bin Laden killed in the raid in Pakistan, one of the officials said.
In addition to the DNA testing, the U.S. also used facial recognition techniques to help identify him, a U.S. official said after the operation.
Senior U.S. administration officials said the body would be handled according to Islamic practice and tradition.
That practice calls for the body to be buried within 24 hours, the official said. Finding a country willing to accept the remains of the world's most wanted terrorist would have been difficult, the official said. So the U.S. decided to bury him at sea."
From Mirror: 

DNA evidence taken from the body of Osama bin Laden proves he is dead, according to the US government.

Two Barack Obama adminitration officials say they can say with 99.9% confidence that they got their man.
The officials did not say where or how the testing was done but the test explains why President Barack Obama was confident to announce the death to the world last night.
Here is a video of the firefight that killed Osama Bin Laden in Pakistan. 
It was 24 Navy Seals who took down Usama Bin Laden in northern Pakistan. This is absolutely amazing! 

Osama Bin Laden Killed? Pictures of his cold dead body?


I was ecstatitically happy last night when I heard the news that Osama Bin Laden had been killed.  Now... I am left with at least a couple questions because of the news I just found out about.  His body, as reported by multiple news sources, has been buried out at sea.  Do you know why our military supposedly did this?  They did this in order to conform to Islamic law.  What??? As it has been stated numerous times OSAMA BIN LADEN AND ISLAMIC EXTREMISTS DO NOT REPRESENT ISLAM so I want to know why would our government give legitimacy to the Islamofascists' cause - the perversion of Islam - by adhering to Islamic law when dealing with the SOB murderous thug bastard's body by giving him a proper Islamic burial?  That just doesn't make sense to me.  The U.S. military has sought after Osama Bin Laden for nearly a decade so why wouldn't both the military commanders and our president want to present us with absolute certainty that Osama Bin Laden is indeed dead?  Why wouldn't they bring his body back to the U.S. to give every American the opportunity to see his lifeless body?  Are we going to be seeing pictures of Bin Laden's lifeless body proving that he is indeed dead?  If not, I am skeptical.... I want to believe that Osama Bin Laden is dead but with this administration's lack of moral fiber and their continued lack of transparency which is even evidenced in Osama's death by not showing the American community his cold dead body their lies in me a a skepticism about the news of his death.  Are we going to hear from any of those in the military who took part in the operation to kill Bin Laden?  I want to believe but.... the proof is buried out at sea. There have been fake photos of Osama released on the internet.



Iran Has Been Protecting Osama Bin Laden, Al-Zawahiri & Top Aides

I first found this article over at Maggie's Notebook.  Here is an article which reveals where both Bin Laden and Al-Zawahiri have been hiding out for the past five years. 

Osama bin Laden's hiding place was pinned down for the first time Monday, June 7, by the Kuwaiti Al-Siyassa Monday, June 7, as the mountainous town of Savzevar in the northeastern Iranian province of Khorasan, 220 km west of Mashhad. He is said to have lived there under Tehran's protection for the last five years, along with Ayman Al-Zawahiri and five other high-ranking al Qaeda leaders.


debkafile's intelligence sources disclosed Monday night that Turkish prime minister Recep Erdogan and his intelligence chiefs are well aware that Bin Laden and Zawahiri are hiding in Iran. The leak to the Kuwait paper was intended to show the Obama administration that the Turkish leader's ties with Iran had grown intense enough for him to be fully in the picture of Iran's secret sanctuary for the authors of the 9/11 attacks on the United States.

Savzevar, a small town of about a quarter of a million inhabitants, is connected by road to Tehran and Mashhad and has a small airport. A center for producing grapes and raisins, its location is remote and difficult to access because it is enclosed by lofty mountains and a salt desert 50,000 square kilometers in area.

On May 13, American intelligence sources reported in detail that senior al Qaeda operatives living in Iran had been allowed to leave the country through Syria to orchestrate terrorist attacks on American targets. Among them was Saif al-Adel, who is believed to have been assigned with planning an attack on the world soccer games opening in South Africa on June 12.

Those sources noted that Saif al-Adel had received his instructions directly from Osama bin Laden and Ayman Zawahiri but did not reveal knowledge of their presence in Iran.

debkafile's counter-terror sources disclose that the purpose of airing their precise whereabouts at this time, aside from implicating the Turkish leader, was first, to warn al Qaeda's leaders that their hideout was blown and they had better move on - which would make them easier to catch; and, second, to nudge US president Barak Obama into a decision to go after them.

A rare opportunity may now be building up to capture the world's most wanted terrorist, debkafile's counter-terror sources report. Last December, US Defense Secretary Robert Gates acknowledged the United States has not had any good intelligence on bin Laden's whereabouts in years. Until recently, the elusive master-terrorist was generally thought to have gone to ground in the wilder parts of Pakistan-Afghanistan border region.

H/T Debka File
H/T Maggie's Notebook

Who is The Real Enemy of Islam?


Ralph Peters asks whether our media is going to capitalize on this very important study which reveals information that Al-Qaeda primarily targets non-Westerners as opposed to Westerners? Scott Helfstein, Nassir Abdullah and Muhammad al-Obaidi have compiled this substantially useful report. But, Ralph Peters asks the question, will we use it? I hope we do, but knowing how our Left Stream Media (MSM) and the way liberals today operate with promoting their anti-American propaganda and hate America policies, as well as tapping into the Muslims' philosophy of hate for us, while at the same time vilifying our military for them doing their superb jobs, I doubt it. The media is the main reason we lost in Vietnam. If the media hadn't put their negative spin on it and played right into the hands of the enemy we would have had a much better chance of winning in Vietnam. But, public relations is extremely important in aiding the winning of wars and the media was hell bent on advancing our enemy to victory by promoting everything that happened that was negative in Vietnam. The liberals and MSM are now playing the same political game now with regards to both Iraq and Afghanistan. They are promoting the negative of both wars while endangering the lives of our brave men and women who are serving in the military overseas. They want the wars to go bad. Instead of putting a positive spin and promoting the defeat of Muslim Jihadists who want to kill us as well as innocent non-Westerners, the media is promoting the negative, aiding the enemy in their efforts promoting a bad PR campaign just as they did in Vietnam. Instead of rooting for the United States, our Left Stream Media is basically being a voice for our enemy. They are promoting anti-Americanism and hate U.S. policies today just as liberals did back in Vietnam. This should be either considered treasonous or seditious. The left spews so much hate for our military that they would rather them lose lives, lose wars, just so they could win a political battle. This is utterly despicable. This is outrageous. We must make sure that this valuable information gets out to the public so people can see the truth about the military and what damage Al-Qaeda and the Taliban have done to Muslims or non-Westerners.


Here is the article written by Ralph Peters:


AL Qaeda does one thing ex tremely well: killing Muslims. Between 2006 and 2008, only 2 percent of the terror multinational's victims were Westerners.
The rest were citizens of Muslim countries. Even as al Qaeda claims to be their defender.

I've long complained that we fail to capitalize on al Qaeda's blood thirst in our information operations. Al Qaeda (as well as the Taliban and other insurgent groups) slaughters Muslims -- yet we let the media flip the blame to us.
Last weekend, a Pentagon insider passed me a no-nonsense study recently released by the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point. "Deadly Vanguards: A Study of al Qaeda's Violence Against Muslims" is exactly the kind of work our analysts should produce -- but rarely do.

Using exclusively Arabic-language media reports and including only those incidents for which al Qaeda proudly claimed responsibility, this scrupulously documented study explodes the myth of al Qaeda as a champion of Muslims:


* Between 2004 and 2008, only 15 percent of al Qaeda's victims were Westerners, and that number skewed upward because of the Madrid and London attacks.


* Between 2006 and 2008, a non-Westerner was 54 times likelier to die in an al Qaeda attack than a Westerner.


* "Outside of the war zones of Afghanistan and Iraq, 99 percent of al Qaeda's victims were non-Western in 2007 and 96 percent were non-Western in 2008."


Bravo to Scott Helfstein, Nassir Abdullah and Muhammad al-Obaidi for producing this supremely useful report. Now the question is: Will we use it?


The propaganda skills of our enemies eclipse our timid, lawyer-ridden information operations. In the Muslim world, we get blamed even for al Qaeda's proudest massacres of Muslims -- while Pakistanis blame us for Taliban suicide bombings.

As this report documents, we possess facts that could be wielded as weapons. But we're no more willing to fight an aggressive information war than we are to wage a serious ground war against our enemies.


Personally, I was astonished -- and delighted -- that this hard-headed report came out of West Point, the most politically correct major institution in the US Army, now dedicated to the proposition that killing our nation's enemies is so yesterday. Is there new hope for the stumbling Long Gray Line?


Back to al Qaeda: Our porcine intelligence system doesn't bother to ask the basic question of why al Qaeda kills Muslims so avidly. (Even conservative Muslim scholars are questioning al Qaeda's practices.)


The answer's as clear as a sunny day in the desert: Al Qaeda fully reflects its Saudi parentage. Neither the Saudis nor al Qaeda cares a whit about individual Muslims. They only care about Islam.


I've seen, in country after country, how the Saudis sacrifice the well-being and human potential of countless Muslims in order to prevent them from integrating into local societies and to promote the dour Wahhabi cult that has deformed Islam so horribly: purity matters, people don't.


Likewise, al Qaeda is happy to sacrifice any number of Muslims to promote its neo-Wahhabi death cult. The al Qaeda serpent may have turned on the Saudi royals, but their differences are a matter of degree.


Meanwhile, we imagine that our passivity and "tolerance" are virtues. We fail to capitalize on al Qaeda's horrendous record, while our government protects the Saudi-funded extremists who poison American mosques.
(Our leaders blather about "freedom of religion," ignoring the fact that there's no freedom of religion in Saudi Arabia. Can't we prohibit religious funding from states that don't themselves exercise tolerance? We're being idiotic, not virtuous.)
We continue to hear endless nonsense from Washington about how "soft power" is so much more effective than military force. OK, show us. Three good men at West Point have given us a powerful information weapon against al Qaeda.


Will our leaders have the sense to use it?

Here is the Report

H/T to Washington Post
 
Best viewed on Chrome, Firefox, Opera & Safari browsers with resolutions 1360 x 768.

Copyright © . Regina Antonio™. Powered by Blogger™. All Right Reserved.