Reports: Osama bin Laden dead

According to multiple news sources, Osama bin Laden, the mastermind behind the attacks in New York on September 11, 2001, has been killed by U.S. military forces and that the U.S. is in possession of bin Laden’s body. According to a senior U.S. counter-terrorism official, bin Laden was killed last week during a ground operation in Pakistan.

President Barack Obama is scheduled to speak tonight to address the topic of Osama bin Laden being killed by U.S. forces, and I’m sure I’ll have more as this develops.

Share:

Related Articles

24 thoughts on “Reports: Osama bin Laden dead

  1. I’m gonna do the most patriotic shit I can do.

    I’m taking my American Ass to Walmart at midnight.

    1. Have you been paying attention to how the Republicans are mightily trying to avoid giving President Obama any credit for killing Osama bin Laden while struggling to find a way to give Bush.

      Cantor actually credited Bush first, and then, almost as an afterthought, said that President Obama deserved “equal credit”.

      Bush blew it at Tora Bora, and went on to “blow it” in terms of finding and taking out Osama bin Laden for nearly eight years, diverting time, energy and resources to Iraq, instead.

      Why can’t the Republicans/wingnuts/teabaggers find it in their hearts to give Bush the “credit” for the disastrous economy he handed off to President Obama, as well?

      Notalib aka Ray? Locke? Rich P? Any thoughts?

      1. I’ll leave my comment below speak for itself on giving Obama proper credit for this.

        I’m not going to bother responding in any way, to you question since I simply do not really see any similarities or ties at all between this situation and the recession. If you want to have a discussion about that – and a list of all of the components that I think were to blame, by all means let’s. But it doesn’t belong here.

        Something I can’t help but point out however, is something I just heard an ABC reporter talk about in giving a rundown of how things played out to get to this point. What was interesting to me was the she said that they got info from a detainee in Guantanamo about a person closely tied to Bin Laden, and it was following this guy that led them to the location where he was holed up & ultimately met his demise.

        In this regard, despite what he said and promised in the campaign, I’ll give the President credit for going back on that promise and maintaining the Bush policy since it appears that played a critical role in finally getting Bin Laden.

        1. What was interesting to me was the she said that they got info from a detainee in Guantanamo about a person closely tied to Bin Laden

          How convenient. 10,001 lies coming out of Guantanamo – the latest revealed being that one of the “worst of the worst” was a cameraman tortured for six years to get information about freaking al Jazeera – and every wingnut on the web latches on to this one.

          1. that was actually a myth, passed on by the mythmakers themselves – Fox news…

            White House deputy national security advisor John Brennan Tuesday knocked down the myth that waterboarding provided crucial intelligence that led to the location of Osama bin Laden.

            “So we’ve been talking about the different details and methods that lead up to this moment, and obviously there is word out today that waterboarding played a very big role or role in actually getting the information,” MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski told Brennan. “Is that the case?”

            “Not to my knowledge,” Brennan explained.

            http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/2011/05/obama-advisor-waterboarding-didnt-lead-to-bin-laden-kill/

        2. I don’t think that you’re obtuse, Locke. So, I’m going to assume that you’re just being disingenuous once again in the face of uncomfortable truths.

          I’m not saying that the hunt for Osama bin Laden was EXACTLY the same thing as the economy. I wasn’t being literal. But, you knew that, didn’t you, Locke.

          Bush had Osama bin Laden cornered in Tora Bora, and let him go, then spent the next 8 years disingenuously saying that he couldn’t be bothered with any one individual by way of explanation/rationalization for his ongoing failure to bring bin Laden to justice.

          Some two years after that, in 2011, in the greatest display of political and anti-factual chutzpah in recent memory, Republicans, wingnuts, teabaggers everywhere, along with the rightwing media, have been quick to try to credit Bush with President Obama’s success in tracking down and killing bin Laden.

          Bush handed a disaster of an economy off to President Obama in January of 2009, and Republicans, wingnuts and teabaggers everywhere, along with the rightwing media, were remarkably quick to say, “Hey, it’s Obama’s economy now”, and, “When are you going to stop blaming Bush [for what his/Republican policy idea and policies caused?]”

          Convenient and entirely self-serving Republican, wingnut and teabagger double-standards and hypocrisy on full display, and, once again, Locke just doesn’t “get it”.

          Well, Locke, sad to say, I’m no longer surprised by your unwillingness to concede the obvious.

  2. Several right leaning posters and bloggers have been critizing the President and claiming he used the speech as purely a campaign platform…particularly for saying I did this and I did that…but if the Commander in Chief isn’t the one who has to make the command decisions when his military and intelligence leaders/advisors present the facts…then who’s in charge?

    1. I didn’t catch any of his speech, so I won’t comment there. This is a substantial victory for the United States, and no matter how much people might try to point out that it was the work of others, the bottom line is that it happened on President Obama’s watch – he was the President when this happened. History will certainly give him credit and shine favorably on his Presidency for this accomplishment – and rightfully so.

      1. I agree with this, but obviously a tremendous amount of credit goes to the soldiers on the ground – Seal Team 6 it’s being reported – who did their jobs so capably.

        1. The question is, Locke, do YOU give him credit?

          Always funny how much you read into my posts that isn’t actually there, but then don’t bother actually reading what is there.

          Posted about an inch above:

          History will certainly give him credit and shine favorably on his Presidency for this accomplishment – and rightfully so.

          Something ambiguous about that?

          1. Ah, Locke, arrogance and feigned cluelessness just don’t mesh well.

            Let’s look at everything that you had to say in the relevant comment, shall we?

            Your partial quote read as follows:

            “History will certainly give him credit and shine favorably on his Presidency for this accomplishment – and rightfully so.”

            What preceded it was this:

            “I didn’t catch any of his speech, so I won’t comment there. This is a substantial victory for the United States, and no matter how much people might try to point out that it was the work of others, the bottom line is that it happened on President Obama’s watch – he was the President when this happened.”

            So. . .”[N]o matter how much people might try to point out that it was the work of others, the bottom line is that it happened on President Obama’s watch – he was the President when this happened.”

            (*laughing*)

            Yeahhhh, Locke, now THAT is what I call a full-throated assignment of credit to President Obama for the judgment that HE exercised in bringing Osama bin Laden to justice, something that Bush failed to do for eight, inept years. “[I]t happened on his watch”, so history will give him the credit for it? That’s an interesting and entirely disingenous way of avoiding giving him actual credit for directing the operation and exercising the requisite judgment to bring it to a successful, “[actual] MISSION ACCOMPLISHED”, conclusion.

            Of course, I asked you how YOU actually felt about it because I was hoping beyond hope, that, if pushed to it, you might be forced to admit that President Obama accomplished something great here, something that the bumbling, “mask his ineptness and failure with false macho bravado”, Bush couldn’t accomplish.

            Instead you elected to adopt a passive, aggressive, “bob and weave”, damn with faint praise, pseudo-“atta boy, uh, sort of” view because you didn’t want to actually credit the President with personally accomplishing anything significant through HIS strength, intelligence and leadership skills.

            History will give him credit because that is what history does? What a crock, Locke.

            How about YOU giving him credit because HE deserves it based upon what HE did.

            You can’t bring yourself to do it, any more than the rest of the Republican/wingnut/teabagger contingent could, because it might boost the President, because it might confer an electoral advantage on the President, because it might just serve, in part, to lay bare the absolute failure and ineptitude of President Bush.

            It’s like every other disingenuously and cynically based position that I have seen you take on other issues. Partisan politics trumps all with you.

            Yep, “what a crock, Locke”.

            You, my disingenuous and cynical wingnut brother, truly are not worth my time. We’re done, Locke. We’re done here. We’re done everywhere.

            I’m not going to waste my time on you anymore.

            Stick with the wingnut echo chambers, Locke. Seriously. Wingnuts don’t notice, much less mind intellectual dissonance, AND you won’t have to waste your time dancing around the truth, and pretending not to “get it”, like you have to do here.

            Good luck.

            1. You can’t bring yourself to do it, any more than the rest of the Republican/wingnut/teabagger contingent could

              Read my damn post. It wasn’t passive aggressive and everyone else seemed to have no problems comprehending it. You couldn’t be more wrong. Nearly your entire post is a rant that bears no real reflection on the reality of what I said. I was being critical of others who try to dismiss the achievement because there were others involved, when President Obama deserves the credit. I have no problem giving him credit for this – and I absolutely could not care less whether doing so makes President Bush look worse or makes it more likely for President Obama to get re-elected or not.

              You, my disingenuous and cynical wingnut brother, truly are not worth my time. We’re done, Locke. We’re done here. We’re done everywhere.

              Is that a promise? Can I hold you to that?

              Can’t say that I’ll miss you Zuma. Though who will be there to completely misunderstand my posts? I’ll especially miss all the name calling. And repeatedly – repeatedly calling me a liar. That’s what I’ll miss the most.

              Just a heads up, though – I’ve been reading and posting here for years, and I have no plans of “Sticking with the wingnut echo chambers.” I suspect I’ll be here with my “disingenuous and cynical wingnut” posts long after you’re gone.

              1. A mind, as they say, Locke, particularly an intelligent one, is a terrible thing to waste.

                Sad to see yours wasting away, immersed as it is in a toxic stew of laughable arrogance and rank partisanship.

                Good to see that the tunnel-vision and snark have survived, though.

                You know what, buddy, now that I think about it, you remind me of the Black Knight who guards the footbridge in “Monty Python and The Holy Grail”.

                Anyway, Locke, I wish you well. You’re going to need it. There’s lots of political heartbreak in your future.

                Enjoy.

  3. This is a substantial victory for the United States

    Imma go with the non-glibertarian libertarians on this one.

  4. Dana Milbank, noted conservative/rightwing apologist/Washington Post columnist had the following to say today in his column:

    “It is my fervent hope that we can harness some of that unity and some of that pride to confront the many challenges that we still face,” [Obama] said.

    Right. Good luck with that, sir.

    Thirteen hours later, Republicans answered Obama’s plea for bonhomie — with broadsides. “The command-and-control paranoia that we see in this administration is antithetical to everything that we understand about freedom in our country,” Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) declared on the Senate floor as the chamber began its first legislative day after a two-week vacation. “Individual responsibility and individual freedom and free markets and free enterprise: They’re attacking it on every front.”

    House leaders emerged from their caucus meeting Tuesday morning with a similar response to the whole unity thing.

    Milbank doesn’t really have some kind of scoop here. The salient point is that the death of Osama bin Laden is causing even people like him to see the obvious. In fact, it’s not just the DC press that’s taken the blinders off, it’s pretty much everyone else, too. The unfortunate, not to mention unproductive, cynicism and rank partisanship of Republicans in the Senate and the House of Representatives is becoming obvious to everyone.

  5. David Koch doesn’t think Obama deserves any credit for killing Bin Laden, and he also remarks that Obama is a hardcore socialist who scares him.

    http://www.wnyc.org/npr_articles/2011/may/05/report-david-koch-calls-obama-socialist-who-deserves-little-bin-laden-credit/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+wnyc_home+%28WNYC+New+York+Public+Radio%29

    If Koch is scared of Obama, the North Dakotans must really make him soil his shorts.

Comments are closed.