Posted by: graemebird | May 6, 2011

Greg Sheridan Demolishes The Proposition That Osama Died When He Was Said To Have.

I’m going to cut and paste what Greg Sheridan said and leave some critical bits out. I’ll then, at some later date, tell you what I left out, and I’ll make an analogy between reading this brilliant article and the PROPER READING OF SCIENTIFIC PAPERS.   The first part is the cut and past (leaving some things out). The analysis will come later.


IT just doesn’t add up.

The official American explanation for the operation against Osama bin Laden keeps changing every day. But at every point it requires such a leap of faith into the extraordinarily unlikely that it has a disturbing ring of contrivance about it.

At first, the US thanked the Pakistanis for their help in the operation and said in briefings they accepted that the Pakistani government and military had no prior knowledge that bin Laden had been hiding out for years

in a mansion on a 4000 sq m compound 800m from Pakistan’s main military academy at Kacul in Abbottabad.

This was and is implausible. The plot of land that housed bin Laden was bought by a member of a Pakistan military-backed terror group.

Quickly, the Americans switched to saying that bin Laden must have had an extensive support network to survive so close to the heart of the Pakistani military establishment, but they won’t go further than that.

This week, The Australian spoke to several senior officials and former officials of different nationalities who have served in Pakistan. All regard it as inconceivable that bin Laden could have been there, unknown to the Pakistanis. As one senior former Indian official said:

“It is impossible to live for one day in any cantonment area of a Pakistani military city without the knowledge of the military itself, much less for years at a time.”

In the analytical community, everyone now privately accepts that bin Laden must have had the support of senior figures in Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence and among other Pakistani intelligence agencies.

The Pakistani military chief, General Ashfaq Kayani, was head of the ISI for three years. It is inconceivable that, in such a sensitive matter, anything was done without his knowledge.

……. In several White House and Pentagon briefings, the Americans have thanked the Pakistanis for contributing intelligence that led them to the Abbottabad compound.

Pakistani efforts may, on occasion, be a little confused, but intentionally leading the Americans to the biggest and most embarrassing secret they are – at the same time – keeping from the Americans seems, frankly, more than a bit strange.

Then there are the physical details of the operation itself. Abbottabad is close to Pakistan’s border with India. Pakistan’s military is the most competent institution, perhaps the only competent institution, in the country. It exists for one over-riding purpose: to thwart India.

Pakistan has fought three wars with India. Its military is trigger-happy, deadly, and paranoid. It half-expects an Indian attack, or incursion of some kind, at every minute of every day. It is also rightly worried about terrorist attacks.

Yet the Americans breached Pakistani air space, flew a couple of helicopters into the city with the biggest military academy and a substantial standing military presence, not to mention extensive military intelligence, crashed one of the helicopters, hovered over Chez bin Laden for 40 minutes or so, conducted what they described as a “fierce” firefight and then flew away, all without provoking any response from the Pakistani military.

Does that sound plausible?

Yet the Americans, having initially thanked the Pakistanis for their co-operation in the mission, are now saying that they didn’t inform the Pakistanis about this at all until after the mission was concluded.

By that time, the Americans say, the Pakistanis were beginning to scramble some jets. The Indians would be fascinated to know how slow the Pakistanis are in even becoming aware of a major assault on a key military city.

A member of the Pakistani public was tweeting about the American mission as it was occurring. He thought the helicopters, especially the one that crashed, might be from the Taliban, or might be some kind of drone attack by the Americans.

Yet 800m away, the Pakistani army apparently slumbered through the whole process.

Then there is the firefight itself. Could bin Laden be killed and in the process only four of his bodyguards and supporters slain?

The compound, according to reports, was heavily fortified. According to American briefings, its inhabitants were consistently practising high-level security procedures, presumably to avoid being seen or spied upon or making themselves a possible target for being shot. Yet at the same time they were apparently so relaxed about security that they didn’t have weapons to hand, didn’t inflict any casualties on the Americans and only three defenders died in the whole exercise, while bin Laden himself didn’t even have a weapon.

Does that have the ring of truth?


Remember that I’ve cut bits and pieces out. Like I would for a scientific study, that gratuitously genuflected to the global warming fraud.  The fact is that this is a take-down of the American lie that they killed Osama when and where they said they did.  More about this story later.  Sensational analysis.



  1. “I’m fairly agnostic on the issue – and I don’t particularly want to see it – but I reckon Obama is not releasing it for the wrong reasons… the whole mishandling of the story has soured the deal somewhat, hasn’t it?”

    No Fleeced it hasn’t soured THE DEAL. Rather its helped THE DEAL along. THE DEAL is that you don’t know what THE DEAL is. But the REAL DEAL has been greatly enhanced by this relentless lying about an incident that never happened, about a fellow who was never Dr Moriarti, about a gentleman who died a long time ago.

  2. “(Reuters) – Al Qaeda confirmed the death of Osama bin Laden on Friday ……..”

    Wow. Look at this. Direct evidence.

    “…… in an Internet message …….. ”

    Nope. No evidence at all. Not even a fucking website to check out. All lies.

  3. Osama Bin Laden is not dead. He has been retired. We await the new symbol of terrorism. The new symbol of terrorism will be another mirage. The mirage covers the real terrorists. The real terrorists are the same people with the same plan.

    One plan. Many tactics.

  4. Well he could be dead. He’s probably dead. There is not much evidence that he was alive these last nine years.

  5. A resident explains how ludicrous the idea is that Bin Laden was living there. Also consider that the claim is they had him under surveillance since August. They did not have him under surveillance since August but supposing that were true. Its not true but supposing it were. They would have photos OF A LIVE BIN LADEN to give to us.

    There was no raid. People have to stop all this bullshit speculation because they are hypnotising themselves into thinking that there was a raid, just as they hypnotised themselves into thinking that bin Laden was a big wheel in 9/11

    Catallaxy is particularly bad for this, since its two administrators, SOON first and later Davidson, are both furiously against the concept of the need for evidence in all areas. They give the “dog ate my homework” response no matter what the subject matter is.

  6. Could OH Sussanna have been a premonition in song form for what would happen to Washington decades later.

    It rained all night the day I left, the weather its was fine. The sun so hot, I froze too death, Susanna don’t you cry…..

    Contrast this to:

    They watched the raid unfolding in real time…….. there was no live footage.

  7. Benjamin Ferencz, a former chief prosecutor in the Nuremberg trials of Nazi war criminals at the end of World War II in an interview with the Flemish newspaper De Morgen said the OBL gangland killing, if it occurred, was wrong: “People cannot be killed in cold blood” by civilised states in this way, he said. And in a letter to the NYT he contrasted the treatment of OBL with that meted out to the leaders of Hitler’s Third Reich, responsible for the deaths of millions.

    “The Nuremberg trials earned worldwide respect by giving Hitler’s worst henchmen a fair trial so that truth would be revealed and justice under law would prevail,” he said. “Secret non-judicial decisions based on political or military considerations undermine democracy.”

    • Yes and thats all fair enough. While there was definitely no raid, there may well have been some executions. This is not civilised behavior. But then no-one has much of an idea what happened. The CIA has posted Obama’s left ear on the two pictures of Osama that they have released. Don’t ask me why. But it will fit into the normal pattern of smaller scandals hiding larger ones. So it could be just another MacGuffin.

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: