Osama Bin Laden Killed in Pakistan-2

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 14 May 2011 07:13

let me guess: story may lead to tracking back some mule movement tracks and traces of evidence of chippanda maal by obl courier services to x-khan labs, with tspa providing secure pathways. In return, bhandar order is placed.

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 14 May 2011 08:22

IDSA COMMENT
China’s Calibrated Response to Osama bin Laden’s Killing ---- R N Das

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 14 May 2011 08:37

More fotus of war dogs

The Osama Opening: Jaswant Singh

KJo · Post by **KJo** » 14 May 2011 08:50

Gagan wrote:Wait till they release some romantic photos of OBL with his wives.
THAT'LL hurt his image.

Maybe Osama sex tape??

Yallah

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 14 May 2011 09:02

The Gun That Killed Osama bin Laden Revealed

Two military gear blogs, citing multiple insider sources, credit the highly reliable HK416 rifle, an M-16 type weapon, with the "double tap" of 5.56 mm bullets to bin Laden's head.

HK, which didn't have any immediate comment, describes the gun on its website as the perfect SEAL weapon: it shoots an effective 5.56 mm round, has a gas system that doesn't foul the weapon like some other rifles, can shoot 20,000 rounds with "minimal degradation of accuracy," and fires just fine after being submerged in water and not completely drained

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 14 May 2011 09:32

Was OBL put in the watery grave or not?
What is that ex CIA guy peddling hain?

Altair · Post by **Altair** » 14 May 2011 09:38

Two military gear blogs, citing multiple insider sources, credit the highly reliable HK416 rifle, an M-16 type weapon, with the "double tap" of 5.56 mm bullets to bin Laden's head.

One Question.
Did Pakistanis find the empty shells of 5.56 calibre after the Americans left? Or Americans cleaned the place of any evidence?

amit · Post by **amit** » 14 May 2011 09:41

KJoishy wrote:
Gagan wrote:Wait till they release some romantic photos of OBL with his wives.
THAT'LL hurt his image.
Maybe Osama sex tape??

Yallah

Read somewhere (maybe a link from this thread itself) that he married six times and the age variable of his wives ranged from one 9 years older than him to the last one (who allegedly was shot in the leg) being 30 years younger. Incidentally OBL "bought" her with money being exchanged in Yemen.

So roughly 40 years difference between eldest wife and youngest. A true Ghazi indeed! AoA!

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 14 May 2011 09:50

Oh man, aren't you guys sick of this OBL crap? I mean every piddly aspect of this raid will be hyped. Heaven knows, how many movies, how many books, you name it will be churned out. Probably an industry will be born around this hype over the next few years.

But lets remember folks, as much as I am glad that US got him, not to mention the brilliant raid, at the end of the day, he was an impotent dik-head. Plus, the cost in lives (American, Iraqi, Afghani, and of course Indian given that GWOT has actually emboldended TSP to attack India even as US confrred Munna status on it) and resources just to get him has been humongous. Add on to that, the fact that OBL was USA's blue-eyed boy during the Soviet era, then looking at the big picture, one wonders if this is a phyrric victory after all? Winners always script history, and bereft of US hype, this victory ought be introspected in the context of the cost and US policies: big picture. The mind numbing celebrations, the self satisfying "good triumphs over evil" nonsense is getting too inane and cheap for my taste.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 14 May 2011 10:11

Osama was videotaped making luv to himself while wives watched taking turn.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 14 May 2011 10:23

There might be a few goats involved for all we know.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 14 May 2011 10:26

And DDM is out with tongs,
The headline is like "Aiiyash Osama" (Pervert Osama), and the like.
The thing that is getting OBLs goat is that OBL repeatedly got married to women half his age.

VikramS · Post by **VikramS** » 14 May 2011 10:57

Another take on mid-air refueling.
thenews.com.pORk/NewsDetail.aspx?ID=15452

SWAT: Two US helicopters landed in Kala Dhaka area of Swat before the operation in Abbottabad, in which Osama bin Laden was allegedly killed, Geo News reported quoting Frontier Corps officials Thursday.

The ground distance from Kala Dhaka to Abbottabad is 150 kilometres, having mountainous terrain in between.

An witness said that the helicopters remained in Kala Dhaka for minutes. There are clear marks left by helicopters in the field. These marks run 30 ft in length and 9 ft in width.

The intelligence agencies have collected the evidence from the site, that according to an eye witness, also included an iron rod which the owner of the field had discovered.

The agencies also picked up gasoline soaked soil from the site.

However, the government of Khyber-Pakhtoonkhwa province has expressed a total lack of knowledge of any such incident.

Provincial Information Minister Mian Iftikhar said the police of district administration had informed nothing in this regard.

VikramS · Post by **VikramS** » 14 May 2011 11:00

CRamS:

Chill man. Osama was never the blue-eyed boy of the US, even during the Soviet era. He hardly ever dealt directly with the US. It was all through the TSPA/ISI. The US did not care much who was on the other side of ISI/TSPA, as long as they were anti-Soviet.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 14 May 2011 11:14

Perhaps he tried hard to be the blue eyed boy, him being a billionaire, and educated and an engineer etc etc, but was rebuffed in favour of uncouth, uneducated, 2nd rung islamists amongst the afghans by the US that sowed the seeds of underlying hatered?

Seemingly small slights in the past have a way of making big impressions on people with big egos.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 14 May 2011 11:19

Prem wrote:Osama was videotaped making luv to himself while wives watched taking turn.

Man, if the videos for this come out, the myth of OBL will be obliterated. No smart bomb, no nuke, can be as humiliating to Muslims as a video showing this. I wonder if US will ever release this.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 14 May 2011 11:21

VikramS wrote:CRamS:

Chill man. Osama was never the blue-eyed boy of the US, even during the Soviet era. He hardly ever dealt directly with the US. It was all through the TSPA/ISI. The US did not care much who was on the other side of ISI/TSPA, as long as they were anti-Soviet.

Thats not the point. OBL was on US side. Do you deny that. And when you go to bed with a cockroach, the cockroach at some point will come back to bite you.

Arjun · Post by **Arjun** » 14 May 2011 11:33

CRamS wrote:Thats not the point. OBL was on US side. Do you deny that. And when you go to bed with a cockroach, the cockroach at some point will come back to bite you.

The 'pimp' (TSPA/ISI) offered OBL to the client (US). Morover the US never dealt directly with OBL - all dealings were handled by ISI.

Given that the pimp is always the one to blame more than the client, OBL needs to be correctly described as a 'TSPA / ISI creation'. This description is also advantageous to India in the current context. Giving more credit to the US is only muddying waters.

ArmenT · Post by **ArmenT** » 14 May 2011 11:35

Harish wrote:Is this a real photo of OBL's dead body?

Nope. It is a fake.

VikramS · Post by **VikramS** » 14 May 2011 11:37

Gagan:
OBL was rebuffed in his family since his mother was not Saudi. She was called a slave and he the son of the slave. He was cut out from the family business by his older brothers (there were a few dozen). That is where the problem started. He got his break when his father died, with his share of the loot being around $300M.

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 14 May 2011 13:44

amit wrote:
Read somewhere (maybe a link from this thread itself) that he married six times and the age variable of his wives ranged from one 9 years older than him to the last one (who allegedly was shot in the leg) being 30 years younger. Incidentally OBL "bought" her with money being exchanged in Yemen.

So roughly 40 years difference between eldest wife and youngest. A true Ghazi indeed! AoA!

no, He was a true follower of p r o p h e t

sum · Post by **sum** » 14 May 2011 14:00

Congratulations Rangudu.

You were the first to say that it must have been an ISI mole who ratted out.
You did this on the 5th of May on your blog. I wrote a piece on BRF on the 10th (I hadn't read your blog until even later).

Could you please provide link to Rangudu's blog?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 14 May 2011 18:14

So, we have no actual DNA proof yet.

Dunno, how much Tom Clancy is collecting to make billions now on this. Some hollywood producer has booked him up already perhaps.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 14 May 2011 18:18

Hey,
And that CIA guy said they haven't dumped the body in the sea.

Please please tell the Pakis where OBL's mazaar is, they all want to go there and do sajda
Puh-leeeeezz

kmkraoind · Post by **kmkraoind** » 14 May 2011 19:21

U.S.-Pakistan and the phone calls after the bin Laden raid

According to this version then, there was a full four-hour gap between the United States officially informing the Pakistan Army that it had just conducted a raid on its territory, and informing the head of state. It also leaves a lingering impression that the president remained asleep after Pasha ordered “his boys” to rush round to the compound when bin Laden was killed to find out what happened.

Unofficially between the four hours, Pasha and KyaNahi got bounty of 25 million.

Raja Bose · Post by **Raja Bose** » 14 May 2011 23:01

Why do I see these excuses being trotted out here, of "US dealt with Osama thru Paki/ISI onlee and never dealt with them jihadis directly onlee" as proof that somehow makes US less complicit than Pakis in giving birth to these terrorists??? They are equally guilty becoz say what you will, US bania-giri ensures that they know exactly what they are funding despite pious claims of we dont know onlee. The same goes for the billions of dollars they are pouring into the Pakis musharraf right now.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 14 May 2011 23:17

While this is a one-sided story (the now-declassified US story) this may help
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB97/index.htm
with evaluating what the US knew, did and when.

Dipanker · Post by **Dipanker** » 15 May 2011 01:16

Gagan wrote:Perhaps he tried hard to be the blue eyed boy, him being a billionaire, and educated and an engineer etc etc, but was rebuffed in favour of uncouth, uneducated, 2nd rung islamists amongst the afghans by the US that sowed the seeds of underlying hatered?

Seemingly small slights in the past have a way of making big impressions on people with big egos.

He was not an engineer. He did a BA in something.

VikramS · Post by **VikramS** » 15 May 2011 01:19

RajaBoseji:

There is some connotation attached to the term "blue-eyed boy" which is not relevant in this case. There is no point distorting things, since it creates an incorrect impression.

Arjun · Post by **Arjun** » 15 May 2011 09:36

Raja Bose wrote:Why do I see these excuses being trotted out here, of "US dealt with Osama thru Paki/ISI onlee and never dealt with them jihadis directly onlee" as proof that somehow makes US less complicit than Pakis in giving birth to these terrorists??? They are equally guilty becoz say what you will, US bania-giri ensures that they know exactly what they are funding despite pious claims of we dont know onlee. The same goes for the billions of dollars they are pouring into the Pakis musharraf right now.

Actually if you look at global media there is way too much emphasis on Osama as a CIA creation, when the actual facts strongly point to TSPA / ISI having the central role - most whole-heartedly supported, of course, by the CIA and other agencies.

TSPA / ISI was responsible for the entire coordination and was the fulcrum of the entire effort to get the Soviets to quit Afghanistan. In keeping with the traditional 'pimp' role / TSPA delusions of being a global geopolitical intermediary- I wouldn't be surprised if the TSPA/ISI dreamed up the whole scheme first and then approached the CIA and others to fund it. Even with regard to funding, the US was not the only provider of funding, weapons and military training - there were also the UK, Saudi Arabia and China.

Btw, Osama himself did not require too much funding given his background. In fact he was pulling in $30 Mil USD a month from his own family and other Saudi sources towards the war effort.

An indication of who had the upper hand in the entire relationship can be surmised from the fact that it is widely acknowledged that the Pakis channeled the funds and training only to groups that it favored for its own purposes, and not to other existing anti-Soviet fighers. The front-ending was completely by the ISI - which again strongly indicates that the ISI created the scheme and went looking for funding and backing from others, rather than the other way around.

It is in India's interest to FIRST put the pimp out of business and then go after the clients of this pimp. Given the opening provided by the OBL death, the world needs to reflect on and recognize both the historical ISI and CIA role - but the former far more so than the latter from India's standpoint.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 15 May 2011 10:54

Osama Bin Laden: Chicken or Egg?

by Raymond Ibrahim
Pajamas Media
May 12, 2011

http://www.meforum.org/2903/osama-bin-l ... ken-or-egg

To posit the significance of Osama bin Laden's demise, we must first decide which came first — the chicken or the egg? Quaint as it is, this question is fundamentally an inquiry into the nature of cause and effect. In our context, did Osama bin Laden "create" the idea of jihad, or did the centuries-old doctrine of jihad — supplemented by Koranic verses to "strike terror into the heart of infidels" (8:12) — create him?

It is clear what the mainstream media would have us think. Take CNN alone; its national security analyst Peter Bergen maintains: "Killing bin Laden is the end of the war on terror. We can just sort of announce that right now." Insisting that the "iconic nature of bin Laden's persona" cannot be replaced, Bergen suggests: "It's time to move on."

Another CNN analyst, Fareed Zakaria, assures us that even if politicians including President Obama aren't saying it yet (you know, "to be cautious"), "the truth is this is a huge, devastating blow to al-Qaeda, which had already been crippled by the Arab Spring. It is not an exaggeration to say that this is the end of al-Qaeda in any meaningful sense of the word."

Rather than limit his analysis to pithy, sensationalist phrases and buzz words — the tools of the trade of op-ed writing — the ambitious Zakaria undermines his own position by actually trying to argue in historical and existential terms:

Al-Qaeda was an idea and an ideology, symbolized by an extremely charismatic figure in Osama bin Laden. … History teaches us that the loss of the charismatic leader — of the symbol — is extraordinarily damaging for the organization. … With the death of bin Laden, the central organizing ideology that presented an existential seduction to the Muslim world and an existential threat to the Western world is damaged beyond repair. … That existential threat is gone.

Indeed, nothing could be further from the truth. How many Muslim "charismatic leaders" and ideologues have come and gone only for the jihad to rage on?

Consider the Islamist leaders of this century alone: Hassan Bana and Sayyid Qutb, founder and chief ideologue of the Muslim Brotherhood, respectively; both were killed, yet over fifty years later, the Brotherhood — the parent organization of many jihadist organizations, including al-Qaeda — is today more dominant than ever, and may well take over Egypt.

Then there is the immensely "charismatic" Ayatollah Khomeini — the original poster-boy of radical Islam, who transformed once secular Iran into a fundamentalist theocracy. Over twenty years after his death, Iran is more radical than ever, and on its way to becoming a nuclear power with eschatological visions of glorious "martyrdom."

One can go on and on. For example, after Hamas' spiritual leader and founder, Sheikh Yassin, was assassinated, far from fizzling, Hamas grew in strength to the point that it now runs the Palestinian Authority.

Bana, Qutb, Khomeini, and Yassin are a meager sampling of Islamist leaders that have come and gone in this century alone. Were one to go further back in time, the continuum of history would unequivocally prove the existentialist nature of the threat: "Charismatic ideologues" — like Ibn Abdul Wahhab (18th century), Ibn Taymiyya (14th century), and Ibn Hanbal (9th century) — have preached the jihad throughout the centuries; and any of these Muslim leaders would make bin Laden look like a sissy.

Indeed, if one doesn't mind being labeled an "Islamophobe," one could trace jihad back to the origins of Islam in the 7th century, to the prophet Muhammad, who proclaimed: "I have been commanded to fight against people so long as they do not declare that there is no god but Allah."

Yet all of them — including the revered prophet of Allah — came and went. And still the jihad rages on.

Ayman al-Zawahiri, now al-Qaeda's de facto leader, once summarized this phenomenon well. Asked in an interview about the status of bin Laden and the Taliban's Mullah Omar, he confidently replied:

Jihad in the path of Allah is greater than any individual or organization. It is a struggle between Truth and Falsehood, until Allah Almighty inherits the earth and those who live in it. Mullah Muhammad Omar and Sheikh Osama bin Laden — may Allah protect them from all evil — are merely two soldiers of Islam in the journey of jihad, while the struggle between Truth [Islam] and Falsehood [non-Islam] transcends time (The Al Qaeda Reader, p.182).

How terribly myopic of mainstream analysts to conclude that the death of bin Laden — of one man—can in any way, shape, or form eliminate the threat of jihad, which has a fourteen-hundred year lineage. It is a sign of the times that the media's most celebrated "experts" cannot — or will not — distinguish between cause and effect.

For our purposes, then, clearly the "chicken" (the cause, the idea) came first, producing many "eggs" (the effects, the believers). Even as we crack and fry up another jihadi-egg — an admittedly large one, bin Laden — the jihad-chicken runs wild, producing batches of eggs around the globe, while the establishment refuses to acknowledge its existence.

Raymond Ibrahim is associate director of the Middle East Forum

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 15 May 2011 11:55

Has any one of you Muhajids seen Tere Bin Laden.

The reactions of the TSP Population WRT the killing remind me of that film.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 15 May 2011 15:27

And let us, meanwhile, not ignore this gem from the Muslim General Tariq, the one who, on crossing the strait into Spain (which would become Al Andalus) from the rock that now bears the name of that same general, and after burning the boats that would allow his army to return: there is no country that is not ours because all countries belong to Allah - a quote attributed to him by Iqbal, the poet from the part of India that became Pakistan (where else?).

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 15 May 2011 15:45

there is no country that is not ours because all countries belong to Allah

And

Prophet Muhammad, who proclaimed: "I have been commanded to fight against people so long as they do not declare that there is no god but Allah."

Are the root cause of perpetual terror being inflicted on the 'unbeliever'. That Excluvist school of thought will have to be erased by whatever means at the disposal of the 'unbeliever'.

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 16 May 2011 04:02

ALERT

In the United States, CBS's famed TV News show "60 Minutes" is just now starting (7pm EST - GMT-5).

The second segment features Amrullha Sale, former Afghan Intelligence Chief. He says "Pakistan should be considered a hostile entity....."

You can listen live by going to a Toronto radio station's website at http://www.newstalk1010.com/ and clicking on the "Listen Live" link.

saip · Post by **saip** » 16 May 2011 07:40

Discovery channel is broadcasting the reenactment with computer graphics etc of the raid. Nothing much and we dont know how much is based on fact and how much is fiction. Two black hawks and two chinooks. I dont understand why they are making such a big deal about the stealth of black hawks when the chinooks have no such thing. Chinooks can buddy refuel the black hawks?

Raja Bose · Post by **Raja Bose** » 16 May 2011 07:59

Regular Chinooks cannot buddy refuel (where's the space with the ramp and everything?) but can act as refueling stations on the ground as they are used to carry fuel bladders and pumps. Special ops variant of Chinook can do buddy refueling iirc. However, apparently in this case US had Combat Talons to do the refueling just like Eagle Claw. This op was kind of Eagle Claw done right (without the hostage rescue component).

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 May 2011 09:14

JE Menon wrote:And let us, meanwhile, not ignore this gem from the Muslim General Tariq,<snip> there is no country that is not ours because all countries belong to Allah

If there is no country that is not ours because all countries belong to Allah, it means that we (Pakistan) are Allah.

Pakistan=Allah

Being against Pakistan is being against Allah. This is well known to us and has been pointed out by me in two separate pieces of work:

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/SRR/Volume13/sastry.html
Video: Making Allah do Pakistan's work (needs YouTube login)
Alternative video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QehgTIOmkmQ

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 16 May 2011 09:45

From the Urdu Press in India

After Osama

The killing of Osama bin Laden and subsequent US statements have generated an intriguing debate. Jamaat-e-Islami’s Daawat, in a front-page comment on May 10 writes, “nobody can say with certainty whether Osama bin Laden is now alive or dead and, if dead, when he actually died. The whole world is compelled to repeat the lessons taught by the American demons (rakshasas).” The paper asks, “was there no need to interrogate him about his network? Was it wise to kill him, or to eliminate him after arresting him and finding out all about his network?”

Rashtriya Sahara writes in an editorial on May 8: “The US argument on the Abbottabad operation is that it has acted against a person who was a threat to every country. But...viewed from this standpoint, there is no major difference between the terrorists of 26/11 and Osama, except the fact that Osama became a criminal for the world community because he was a criminal for the US. Meanwhile an effort is being made to view the 26/11 terrorism merely as a crime against India.” Veteran journalist and lyricist Hasan Kamal writes in his column in Sahafat on May 9: “Regarding the claim that America conducted the entire Abbottabad operation on its own and did not take any help of the Pakistani army or the ISI... No country can conduct any military operation in another country without its permission or, at least, keeping it informed. It is impossible from the point of view of international laws. Only a few days before this episode, the chief of Pakistan’s ISI, Shuja Pasha reached Washington and left in the evening. What was the message that he so quietly delivered to the US officials? The propaganda that there has been a major crack in the relations between US and Pakistan following the killing of Osama is a huge exaggeration”.

Regarding the possible impact of Osama’s killing on Indian Muslims, Siasat writes in an editorial on May 5 — “the reaction of Muslims shows that the majority did not show any interest or express any denial or sorrow. Though a mischievous effort was made by some to find out what Muslims felt about Osama, they were disappointed by the complete disinterest.” Munsif , in its editorial on May 3 asks; “now that Osama bin Laden has been killed, will the US call back its forces from Afghanistan? Afghanistan was attacked only over the demand for handing Osama over to the US. If the American war is not against Islam, the US or its allies should not be concerned with the situation in Afghanistan after the death of Osama bin Laden.”

shyam · Post by **shyam** » 16 May 2011 12:41

Ahmadinejad TV Interview

[On the issue of Osama bin Laden's death]

I have clear information that Bin Laden was in U.S. custody since a very long time ago. He was sick. They had him. But they killed him.

This is because the president of the United States wants to use it for his personal gain -- that means he wants it to use it for his reelection.