Bin Laden – The Killing of the Evil One

So they have killed the Evil One [1], the fount of all that is against Truth, Justice and the American Way (OK, you know this is becoming my favourite new snark-phrase, don’t you?).

I suppose there is a chance that this whole thing was a put-up job, meant to let Osama make a safe getaway. But, not being a conspiracy theorist, unless there’s evidence to the contrary, I’ll grant they have Osama bin Laden’s head on ice, and probably at this moment people with adequate security clearances are lining up to get a look at it in return for contributions for Barack Obama’s re-election campaign.

Wait…I just read that last sentence again, and it doesn’t sound as facetious as I meant it to be. After all, this is going to be the USP of Obama’s 2012 bid, isn’t it? The Man Who Got bin Laden? How can you, with any conscience, vote against the man who Killed the Most Dangerous Evildoer In The World? Are you With Us or With The Terrorists? Huh?

And there’s another pay off from it too, which I’ll get to in a minute. But meanwhile –

Maybe it’s time to hang out the bunting and give the Faux News people their American Flag tie pins back. Maybe the world’s now safe for Truth, Justice, etc.

And then again, maybe not.

I’m not grudging anyone their celebration. Let anyone who wishes, celebrate. After all, the facts will still be there when they come back to earth.

And what are these facts?

1. Osama bin Laden was a figurehead. The real power in Al Qaeda was, and is, Ayman al Zawahiri, the Egyptian doctor who turned to jihad after being imprisoned and tortured in recently-thrown-overboard US vassal Hosni Mubarak’s jails. Does anyone wish to remember how all these years we kept hearing bin Laden was dead and gone? Wasn’t Al Qaeda still being touted as a threat then? Now, with him really dead and gone, will Al Qaeda cease to be a threat? (Assuming it was one in the first place; more on that, also, in a minute.)

Apart from making my mother, who always thought bin Laden was such a handsome man, sad, said killing will do absolutely nothing except give Al Qaeda (and the militant version of right wing Islam) a martyr, and yet more cause to hate the Empire. Even the Empire itself acknowledges that, since it asked its citizens to be careful of anti-American violence while travelling. In Pakistan, certainly, the knowledge that American forces are operating without the knowledge or permission of the government [2] will certainly further increase anti-American hatred.

If all the killing has done is increase threat levels against Americans, is it something to celebrate?

Common sense, which is pretty rare on the ground these days, will say no.

2. Osama bin Laden was a Frankenstein’s Monster. It would seem hardly necessary to point that out, but for some reason far too many Americans refuse to remember that it was Reagan’s US (the same Reagan whom these same Americans love to celebrate, not coincidentally) which helped arm, train and create the same “Islamofascist threat” which it now calls the greatest threat to its values and civilisation. One might say it’s kind of sadistic of me to keep going over the point that the original US-sponsored jihad in Afghanistan was against a modernist, secular government which put women in classrooms and behind steering wheels. One might even say it’s all water under the bridge. But it isn’t.

It isn’t, because the creation of a Frankenstein’s Monster isn’t a one-time thing. Even as the Obama Imperium celebrates the demise of the Most Evil Man in the Universe, how many other Frankenstein’s Monsters is it arming, training and financing even as we speak? In…oh, Libya for instance, with all those brave freedom-fighting rebels (just as Al Qaeda and the mujahideen were brave freedom fighters in Afghanistan, if you care to remember) who set off fireworks to celebrate the murder of Moammar Gaddafi’s young grandchildren? [3]

3. Terrorism-wise, Al Qaeda is a joke. Despite all the brouhaha over how it’s the Greatest Threat to Humanity, Al Qaeda’s actual achievements, over the years since 11 September 2001, have been anything from utterly pathetic to less than modest. (I’ll assume for now that 11/9 was actually an Al Qaeda operation, though as far as I am aware nobody, including the same US administration that destroyed three countries in the name of fighting it, has yet proved Al Qaeda’s complicity in that act.) Except for an odd assassination here and there, Al Qaeda has achieved less than an outfit like the National Socialist Council of Nagaland (Isak Muivah), the murderous Baptist terrorist group which openly runs an armed base called Camp Hebron near Dimapur, well within Indian territory, collects taxes, and runs a parallel government [4]. Al Qaeda’s only real contribution has been by courtesy of American overreaction, as bin Laden himself was all too aware. As he said [5],

“All that we have to do is to send two mujahedin to the furthest point East to raise a piece of cloth on which is written al-Qaeda, in order to make the generals race there to cause America to suffer human, economic, and political losses without their achieving for it anything of note other than some benefits for their private companies.”

Al Qaeda, in fact, has been extremely good at using the US as a proxy, in order to overthrow regimes which were aggressively anti Al Qaeda, whether in Iraq, or now in Libya, where another regime change effort is increasingly openly under way. In fact, any Muslim nation under American intervention almost automatically becomes more amenable to Al Qaeda, and don’t think the group doesn’t know this. The enemy of one’s enemy is at least not an enemy, if not quite a friend.

Will the United States declare its Global War Of Terror is over with the elimination of bin Laden, pull up its tent pegs from Afghanistan and Iraq, drop plans to invade Iran and any other nation that doesn’t suit its fancy, and go home? Of course not. Will the Empire stop supporting murderous dictators in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia so long as they continue to be reliable “allies”? Of course not. Will the Empire support democratic aspirations in those nations? Again, of course not. Therefore, since the Empire’s string of colonies will not be reduced by an iota, will Al Qaeda’s support drop? Of course not.

Getting back to that point, it’s almost as though the US and Al Qaeda were at an understanding. You know, somehow, all those countries the US invades (or has its proxies invade, as in Somalia) due to fear of Al Qaeda, seem to be countries the US would have liked to control anyway, like Iraq, and Afghanistan, and Somalia, not to mention Pakistan, which is no longer anything more than a US colony without a trace of independence. I certainly hope their understanding doesn’t suddenly break down now! We wouldn’t want to jeopardise another Peace Prize, would we?

Just imagine if Al Qaeda now decides that it’s been playing along long enough, and launches a genuine terrorist strike on American soil, smuggling in, let’s say, a nuke by container ship. Almost none of the seaborne cargo entering the US is inspected, and the only plausible reason Al Qaeda hasn’t used this route yet is that it did not want to. But now it may decide the partnership is over, and act accordingly.

What then?

4. Al Qaeda isn’t a unitary organisation; it’s a franchise [6]. Anyone, anywhere, can call himself Al Qaeda. It doesn’t take much more than one guy, a little internet research, and a half-baked idea like an underwear bomb to call himself Al Qaeda. Some of these franchises, like the late Abu Musab Al Zarqawi’s Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, were officially granted by the Zawahiri-bin Laden duo. Others just spring up like that, with one or more disaffected individuals (upset over things like, oh, Muhammad cartoons or burning Korans, maybe, or maybe by a million murdered Iraqis) taking it on themselves to become Al Qaeda.

5. Most Muslim “terrorists” aren’t Al Qaeda. A hell of a lot of them are in fact ideologically as far from Al Qaeda as you can get, especially the Shia groups, like Hizbollah. You know, the same Hizbollah which defeated the 2006 Zionazi invasion of Lebanon? That Hizbollah.

Many of them hate Al Qaeda worse than they hate the “west”, assuming any of them actually hate the “west” as an entity and not the misdeeds of the selfsame “west”. The Afghan and Iraqi resistance movements are conducted by groups which have in the former instance nothing more to do with Al Qaeda and in the latter instance never had. Eliminating Al Qaeda, even if such a thing were possible, would make no difference at all to these groups.

6. Killing Osama bin Laden will do nothing to reverse the Empire’s increasing state of economic collapse. It won’t pay off the deficit, get homeless people off the street, or do anything else to avert the Decline and Fall of the American Empire. Once the flag-waving euphoria and the fairly hilarious HAIL TO OUR COMMANDER IN CHIEF BARACK OBAMA (yes, I actually saw that as a comment on one website, block letters and all!) rhetoric dies out, everyone’s going to have to face the same old depressing realities.

7. The Nobel Peace Prize Winner Barack Obama has said that Osama bin Laden has killed many innocent people. If it were so, it was a grievous fault; and grievously hath Osama answered it…even though he started off killing innocent people as a tool of the Empire, and though there’s never been proof that he was behind 11/9 anyway. But what about the people killed by the Empire on the pretext of hunting down Osama?

I’ve already alluded to the million or more Iraqis killed by the Empire, and to that we can add the Afghans and Pakistanis who die daily in the “War On Terror”; the Somalis who were invaded in 2006 by the Empire’s proxy, Ethiopia; the Yemenis, whose murderous dictator is still being armed and financed by the Empire even as his own people continue to rebel against him; and who knows how many more to come. But there are the indirect casualties as well.

Another little episode Americans are loath to remember, but should be reminded of, was the destruction of the Al Shifa pharmaceutical factory by Bill Clinton’s regime in 1998 [7] on the excuse that it was making nerve agents and that its owners had ties with Al Qaeda. No such production or ties were ever discovered, and tens of thousands of Sudanese civilians are estimated to have died due to lack of medicines as the result of that bombing [8]. Bill Clinton’s wife Hillary is now Emperor Obama’s Secretary of State and widely thought to have made the United State’s foreign policy her own exclusive fief.

Who has killed more people, the Most Evil Man in the World, or the Forces of Good who have been trying to hunt him down?

8. The elimination of Osama bin Laden should be excellent news to the genuine anti-Empire resistance movements worldwide. Especially if they are Muslim, they can now fight the Empire without, even if by association, linked to 11/9 or other Al Qaeda attacks. This is precisely the same thing that happened when Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia chief Abu Musab Al Zarqawi was killed in Iraq. The genuine Iraqi resistance wasn’t affected at all, but was freed from association with the murderous Jordanian terrorist.

9. I’ve alluded above to the other spin-off from the killing of Osama bin Laden. Just yesterday, the world was talking about the murder of Moammar Gaddafi’s (apolitical, student) son and three very young grandchildren. The Empire, and NATO, at first denied any such incident had even taken place. When the evidence, in the form of bodies and the testimony of the Roman Catholic Bishop of Tripoli, Giovanni Martinelli, came in, NATO was in a fix [9]. But now attention has been diverted from that little contretemps where it really matters: the infinitesimal attention span of the Imperial media. Now the invasion and occupation of Libya can go ahead.

Is it only my cynicism that makes me wonder if bin Laden hadn’t been killed several days ago and someone was waiting for an appropriate opportunity to announce it to the world, when the political benefits could be maximised? Is it actually beyond the realms of possibility?

No.[10]


Note: I should point out that the Osama bin Laden whose corpse was displayed on Pakistan TV looked not very much like the bin Laden of the pictures and videos [11]; and that since his corpse was buried at sea, nobody can check American claims for themselves any longer [12]. Make of that what you will.

Sources:

[1] http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/osama-bin-laden-killed/story?id=13505703

[2] http://news.outlookindia.com/item.aspx?720672

[3] http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/….ld-2277676.html

[4] http://orijitsen.blogspot.com/2010/03/inside-camp-hebron.html

[5] http://antiwar.com/horton/?articleid=6654

[6] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13257441

[7] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Shifa_pharmaceutical_factory

[8] http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq16.html

[9] http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2011/05/….the-globalists/

[10] http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2011/05/….n-card/#respond

[11] http://news.outlookindia.com/item.aspx?720675

[12] http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2011/05/02/bin-laden-buried-at-sea/

(not giving link to original post, came from a friend who compiled info)

About these ads

2 thoughts on “Bin Laden – The Killing of the Evil One

  1. UPDATE, Or, WHY MY DOUBTS KEEP GROWING.

    So, twenty-four hours after the elimination of the Evil One broke on my personal consciousness, what further do I have to say?

    Well, quite a lot, actually.

    First, of course, is something I’ve already said elsewhere: that I wouldn’t trust the Empire’s media to tell me the right time. I find it quite charming that the same people who admit that the Empire’s media deliberately and repeatedly lied about WMDs in Iraq, the economic meltdown and just about anything else will say each time a new questionable statement comes up, “But, yes, this time they aren’t lying!”

    Therefore, I have, and will continue to, maintain a healthy scepticism where the claims made by the Empire are concerned and will make up my own mind.

    So, what exactly do we have?

    We have Osama being killed in the course of a ‘firefight’in the Pakistani town of Abbotabad, which is apparently an affluent ex-military colony, and where he had a mansion. Said mansion was apparently eight times bigger [1] than any other building in the area, and, besides:

    Nestled in an affluent neighborhood (sic), the compound was surrounded by walls as high as 18 feet, topped with barbed wire. Two security gates guarded the only way in. A third-floor terrace was shielded by a seven-foot privacy wall. No phone lines or Internet cables ran to the property. The residents burned their garbage rather than put it out for collection. Intelligence officials believed the million-dollar compound was built five years ago to protect a major terrorist figure. [2]

    Now, I admit I’m no big expert in the hiding-out game, but it strikes me that if you choose to conceal yourself in the belly of the beast – in the nerve centre of a country crawling with CIA spies who do not have any accountability to the host country’s laws, for instance [3] – and you choose to hide out in that manner, and for all of two years to boot, you might as well be putting out a signboard saying LOOK HERE! SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY! I’d have thought that you’d be better off shaving your beard instead of doing a fairly crummy dye job, and hiding out in small private houses, frequently changing location to throw off pursuit. But then what do I know.

    What I know, though, is that all the accounts we’re getting of the actual so-called firefight in which the World’s Most Wanted Man was killed come from one side, and one side only; and that side has very well-entrenched reasons to tell only its preferred version of the story. Therefore, when we hear that bin Laden’s youngest wife (who was allegedly killed with him) was being used by him as a “human shield” [4], it does occur to me to ask how, precisely, we know that such a thing actually happened. This woman may have been used as a human shield, and shot (though according to usual hostage situation SOP I don’t know if human shields are considered expendable). She may have been shot, deliberately or accidentally, by the attackers when she was nowhere near the Evil Dead One. She may have been killed when she threw herself in the way of a bullet in order to protect her beloved. We just don’t know.

    What we do know is that not one of the people in that house survived the assault, in a wounded condition or otherwise, so there is no one alive to refute or confirm the official story. You just have to take it on trust. And anyone familiar with the Empire’s lies, dating back to the “Kuwait incubator” fabrication of 1990 [5], should have any particular reason to believe the Empire’s story without independent corroboration.

    We also know that the Empire now claims that so-called “burial at sea” was planned well in advance. First, I strongly doubt the “burial at sea” story; it’s far more likely that bin Laden’s corpse is now in a locker somewhere in the bowels of the Pentagon. In fact, if it is really bin Laden’s body, any other move would be inconceivable. Secondly, it’s kind of rich for the same country which had no scruples parading Saddam Hussein’s sons’ corpses around Iraq for eleven days after their death [6] to “prove they were dead” to now claim they were respecting Muslim sentiments by burying bin Laden within 24 hours. It’s totally ridiculous.

    Then, while the Empire claims that the Evil One would have been captured if possible, it’s fairly evident that no real plans were ever made for his actual capture, and that the only aim of the raid was to kill him. After all, since the Empire’s official spokesman “doesn’t know” whether Osama even fired a gun [7], it doesn’t take rocket science to figure out that the objective was to kill him. In any case, he could never have been brought to trial, in an open court; to this day no evidence has ever been presented linking him to the crime for which he was blamed, at least three countries to date destroyed, and well over a million people killed, and the FBI has admitted that it has no such evidence [8]. Besides, inconvenient truths have a nasty way of coming out in open court, and bin Laden was privy to a lot of skeletons in the Imperial closet.

    Therefore, it wasn’t anything more than vigilante “justice”, not too unlike a lynch mob. That’s obvious to anyone and everyone who cares to think of it; and plenty of people are, in fact, rejoicing in that aspect of it, especially in the chronically Islamophobic halls of the Great Indian Muddle Class mind. A quick sweep through Indian websites will show the shrill howls for summary murder of accused Muslim “terrorists”, and anyone (like me) daring to show dissent is automatically branded a bin Laden sympathiser.

    I’m not saying bin Laden isn’t dead. I am, though, saying openly that we haven’t got the real story, and considerable effort has gone into ensuring that we never shall.

    But what is the final word on this whole carnival show? Hillary Clinton, she who rules the Empire’s foreign policy [9]

    (presented) the killing … less as a game-changer than as a vindication for the overall policy of endless war worldwide.

    That’s right, the destruction of Iraq and Afghanistan, the proxy invasion of Somalia and its return to civil war, the drone strikes murdering civilians round the clock in Pakistan and Yemen, the ongoing devastation of Libya, are all now post facto justified because the Empire has, allegedly, “got its man.” And the wars are set to continue.

    Who is the real Fount of All Evil here?

    Sources:

    [1] http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2011/05/01/w….he-troops-home/

    [2] http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110502/ap_on_re_us/us_bin_laden_the_raid

    [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_Allen_Davis_incident

    [4] http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110502/pl_afp/usattacksbinladenshield

    [5] http://911review.com/precedent/decade/incubators.html

    [6] http://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/03/world/….th-america.html

    [7] http://content.usatoday.com/communities/….n-laden-alive/1

    [8] http://content.usatoday.com/communities/….n-laden-alive/1

    [9] http://news.antiwar.com/2011/05/02/clinton-vows-wars-will-continue/

    Update to the Update:

    Just came across this link saying the famous photo was a fake dated 2009.

    http://www.indianexpress.com/news/Photo-turns-out-fake–is-dated-2009/784846/

    According to The Guardian, the image was actually first published by Middle East news website Themedialine.org back in April 2009, alongside a warning that its authenticity had not been confirmed.

    So now we don’t even have…a photo.

  2. Wonderful insight Bill. Well, it has always been in the minds of many of how they have themselves raged the war against themselves by various incidents.
    It kinda reminds me of the whole USA-Japan incident. USA stopped the trades and freeze Japanese accounts and assets to result in Pearl Harbor and Hiroshima-Nagasaki.
    No of civilians died when the “Empire” decided to take down al-qaeda is more than the “war on terror” itself.

    http://www.infowars.com/63-percent-of-people-killed-in-iraq-war-were-civilians-report/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,375 other followers

%d bloggers like this: