By David North |  4 May 2011

OF ALL THE IMAGES  that have emerged from the morally unclean events of Sunday night, the most politically significant and, one has reason to believe, enduring will prove to be the official photograph, released by the White House, of President Barack Obama, Vice President Joseph Biden, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and other high officials of the United States government seated together in the situation room as they witnessed the killing of Osama bin Laden and several other human beings, including one woman.

Normally, the witnesses to an execution are not photographed. But the White House clearly wanted this “historic moment” captured for posterity. The eyes of all the participants in this ghoulish tableau—with the exception of a military officer who is working his computer—are apparently focused on a television screen. Obama, leaning forward, is stone faced as he stares ahead. Gates wears the sour expression of a man who is too well acquainted with such operations. Hillary Clinton’s right hand is raised over her mouth, a gesture that betrays the horror of what is unfolding before her eyes.

After bin Laden had been liquidated, the White House and the media moved quickly to orchestrate the celebration of what was, in fact, an extra-legal state killing. The president chose the East Room to inform the nation, late Sunday night, of bin Laden’s death.

Obama, so desperately anxious to associate himself with the killing, no doubt believes that this is the “defining” event of his presidency. But what does this conception—so enthusiastically endorsed by the media—say about the political and moral condition of the government of the United States?

The scenes that followed the announcement of bin Laden’s liquidation—or, to be more precise, those reported and encouraged by the media—have been ugly and degrading. The grunting of “USA! USA!”—a chant which was unknown in the United States until it was incited by the filthy chauvinism of sportscasters who disgraced the 1984 Olympic Games in Los Angeles—has over the last quarter century assumed the character of a public ritual. Of course, very few people are involved in such displays of political backwardness. But they are featured and promoted by the media to intimidate the public, suppress critical thought, and encourage a sense of political and emotional isolation among all those who are not prepared to surrender their democratic principles and moral integrity.

By now, what words can one find to describe the mass media in the United States? The response to the killing of bin Laden exposes yet again the degree to which the distinction between news and propaganda has been virtually effaced. In an unintentionally revealing comment, as the networks awaited Obama’s speech, CNN’s principal anchor, Wolf Blitzer, informed his audience that the network had received a message from the White House complimenting CNN for its “responsible” coverage of the unfolding events. This compliment, which would be received with shame by a serious journalist, was reported by Blitzer with pride.

The front page of Tuesday’s New York Times carries a banner headline: “Behind the Hunt for Bin Laden.” The article that follows is not a news lead, but rather a work of bootlicking propaganda. We read: “For an intelligence community that had endured searing criticism for a string of intelligence failures over the past decade, Bin Laden’s killing brought a measure of redemption. For a military that has slogged through two, and now three vexing wars in Muslim countries, it provided an unalloyed success. And for a president whose national security leadership has come under question, it proved an affirming moment that will enter the history books.”

So much for a critical examination of the clear illegality of the incursion into Pakistan and the killing itself, let alone an investigation of the mass of unanswered questions and contradictions raised by the Obama administration’s version of events. In fact, by Tuesday night the initial claims that bin Laden had been killed rifle in hand were refuted by later reports that he was unarmed when he was shot to death.

The Times’ lead editorial is no less celebratory. It begins: “The news that Osama bin Laden has been tracked and killed by American forces filled us, and all Americans, with a great sense of relief.”

Aside from the Times’ unwarranted presumption that it speaks for “all Americans,” why should the killing of a man who has been in hiding for a decade and who was, as is almost universally acknowledged, incapable of significantly influencing, let alone directing events, produce “relief?” Why should the “relief” over his killing outweigh the profound concern that should be aroused by the far-reaching and long-lasting consequences and implications of the United States’ extra-legal killing of an individual? Not surprisingly, the Times fails to note that the murder of bin Laden occurred just one day after the United States and NATO killed the son and three grandchildren of Muammar Gaddafi in an unsuccessful attempt to assassinate the Libyan leader.

The media proclaims over and over the “historic” significance of the killing of bin Laden. It has not been able, however, to explain precisely why this event is of such monumental significance. Neither Obama nor the media have sought to suggest that bin Laden’s death will bring an end to the wars and occupations in which the United States is engaged. Quite the opposite: theNew York Times declared, in the same above-cited editorial, “Even as we now breathe a bit more easily, we must also remember that the fight against extremists is far from over.” In other words, the wars will continue. Another bogeyman will soon be found, or invented, to take the place of bin Laden.

The misuse of the term “historic” to describe Sunday’s killing is not merely an example of journalistic exaggeration. It expresses a delusional belief within the American ruling class that it can through acts of wanton violence determine the course of history.

But the movement of history is shaped by processes, economic and social, that are far more powerful than the American military.

The inexorable decay of American capitalism continues. During the last 20 years, despite the endless series of military engagements and wars, it has not been possible for the ruling class to restore the global economic position of the United States. During the week that preceded bin Laden’s killing, the US dollar fell to historic lows.

American capitalism remains mired in the worst economic recession since the Great Depression. The national government teeters on the brink of bankruptcy. The states are starved of resources. The social infrastructure is breaking down. The greed, corruption and parasitism of the super-rich are provoking ever greater popular indignation. But the political system is incapable of responding to popular demands for social reform and economic relief.

As with so many of the previous events deemed “historic” by American presidents and the media—the capture of Saddam Hussein being among the more recent—this one too will be quickly overtaken by the unforeseen consequences of the reckless decisions from which it emerged. Obama’s “historic moment” will soon prove to be only another sordid episode in the political, economic and moral putrefaction of the American ruling class.

David North is a political analyst with the World Socialist Web Site.

_______________________________________
To breathe the true air of freedom and democracy you need independent media lungs. Staffed with journalists and political observers not beholden to the status quo.
SUPPORT THE GREANVILLE POST AND CYRANOS JOURNAL TODAY.

[donation-can goal_id=’support-tgp-before-were-gone’ show_progress=true show_description=true show_donations=false show_title=true title=”]

____________________________________________

Freedom Rider: Obama’s Killing Spree

By Black Agenda Report editor and senior columnist Margaret Kimberley
Created 05/04/2011

Obama receiving standing ovation after Osama raid.

OBAMA is certainly living the thug life, an international gangster without parallel. What is to lesser humans a planet is, to Obama, a spherical theater of war, a free-fire zone. With two more notches in his gun, the First Black President is ensuring that Black Americans will be viewed as just another brand of ugly, violent Americans set loose on the world. And “the Peace Prize winner will once again give a lofty, well written speech about why it makes no sense to be peaceful.”

“Extrajudicial killing is now the rule, and not the exception for the United States.”

Barack Obama was trying for a double homicide this weekend. He hoped to kill both Muammar Gaddafi [7] and Osama bin Laden [8] in one fell swoop. Bin Laden’s luck ran out, but Gaddafi used up another of his nine lives and survives while his son and three of his grandchildren are dead, killed in a NATO attack on their home.

The United States government murdered members of Gaddafi’s family in a blatant violation of American and international law. The peace prize laureate is in fact a typical American president, using lies and outright thuggery in order to promote the dictates of the American empire.

That empire is on its way out, but the final demise may take years, or decades, and the raw power of American military might well continue to bring devastation to the world. The Gaddafi family and Osama bin Laden are but the latest victims in the body count.

Not only were these killings assassinations and therefore illegal under American law, but they play a terrible role in promoting beliefs in exceptionalism and exceptional suffering. Judging from the gloating and celebration invoked by bin Laden’s death, one would think that Americans were completely innocent of bringing bloodshed to any part of the world.

Obviously that is not true. Not only is America guilty of many crimes committed both within and outside of its borders, but the terrorist attacks that took place on September 11, 2001 became the pretext for an orgy of even greater numbers of killings. Thousands of Afghan civilians have died for the simple reason that Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda planned the attacks while using that country as a base. The occupation of Iraq was born out of an utter and complete lie, a claim that Saddam Hussein was, like al Qaeda, a threat to the safety of Americans.

“One would think that Americans were completely innocent of bringing bloodshed to any part of the world.”

The Obama administration is not quite so ham fisted as the Bush regime, but Muammar Gaddafi has taken on the role played by Saddam Hussein. Just last year, we were assured that Gaddafi was a friend and an ally of the United States, and that the Reagan era attempt to kill him was a long distant memory, never to be repeated because Gaddafi was now on the good list of foreign policy makers.

How times have changed. Last month Obama, British prime minister Cameron, and French president Sarkozy issued a joint statement which said in part, “Colonel Gaddafi must go, and go for good.” Well, killing someone certainly insures they are gone for good, and the three intended to make good on that threat.

Extrajudicial killing is now the rule, and not the exception for the United States. Not only that, but our court system, which in the pre-Bush days were used for terrorism trials, are now off limits politically. When the Obama administration briefly planned to try Khalid Sheik Muhammad in New York, all hell broke loose. New Yorkers were told, falsely, that their lives would be at risk and their city would have to shut down. Of course, the expense would have been great, but it would have been possible to carry out a civilian court trial had the Obama administration not knuckled under to pressure to ignore the rules of law.

Obama, the so-called change agent, has proven to be exactly like his predecessors. His poll numbers are high because he killed people in a far away place. One of the victims was a perpetrator of a crime against Americans, but had the country not fallen into such a lawless state, he might have been brought to trial in a courtroom. The United States is now less civilized than ever, and even if Obama had been inclined to do so, most Americans would howl and moan at the prospect of bin Laden receiving true justice. It is a pity. It would have been wonderful indeed for the United States to make even a small attempt to live up to the ideals it once followed. Even the Nazi leadership were tried in open court.

“The United States is now less civilized than ever.”

On Thursday Obama will go to the site of the old World Trade Center and make a speech about why he had to kill bin Laden and why it was right to do so. The Peace Prize winner will once again give a lofty, well written speech about why it makes no sense to be peaceful.

The carnival atmosphere is growing more awful by the moment. The corporate media (*link lies) immediately told the story of the bin Laden killing by repeating government lies about women used as human shields and has now descended into worship of the black ops, special, wonderful, very elite, calm, cool, collected and totally awesome troops who did the killing. CIA director Leon Panetta is even suggesting who should portray him in a movie. It would be easy to make fun of Panetta, but he knows of what he speaks. Hollywood will come calling and the only question remaining will be who will portray the peace prize winning killer president.

Margaret Kimberley’s Freedom Rider column appears weekly in BAR, and is widely reprinted elsewhere. She maintains a frequently updated blog as well as at http://freedomrider.blogspot.com. [9] Ms. Kimberley lives in New York City, and can be reached via e-Mail at Margaret.Kimberley@BlackAgendaReport.com.

[10]

Source URL: http://blackagendareport.com/content/freedom-rider-obama%E2%80%99s-killing-spree

Links:
[1] http://blackagendareport.com/category/department-war/attack-libya
[2] http://blackagendareport.com/category/department-war/gaddafi-attempted-assassination
[3] http://blackagendareport.com/category/department-war/obama-peace-prize
[4] http://blackagendareport.com/category/department-war/osama-assassination
[5] http://blackagendareport.com/category/department-war/us-hit-list
[6] http://blackagendareport.com/sites/www.blackagendareport.com/files/obama_free_libya.jpg
[7] http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2011/04/2011430224755721620.html
[8] http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/2011/05/2011526196121642.html
[9] http://freedomrider.blogspot.com/
[10] http://www.addtoany.com/share_save?linkurl=http%3A%2F%2Fblackagendareport.com%2Fcontent%2Ffreedom-rider-obama%25E2%2580%2599s-killing-spree&linkname=Freedom%20Rider%3A%20Obama%E2%80%99s%20Killing%20Spree

_________________________________________
To breathe the true air of freedom and democracy you need independent media lungs. Staffed with journalists and political observers not beholden to the status quo.
SUPPORT THE GREANVILLE POST AND CYRANOS JOURNAL TODAY.

[donation-can goal_id=’support-tgp-before-were-gone’ show_progress=true show_description=true show_donations=false show_title=true title=”]____________________________________________

Illustration by Leon Kuhn.  More of his work at http://www.leonkuhn.org.uk/ [8]

This weekend the White House announced the extrajudicial killing of Osama Bin Laden, and the secret disposal of his body at sea. Are we any safer now? And would it be any different if George W. Bush were making the same announcement four years ago?

Who says there’s no difference between Republicans and Democrats in the White House? Imagine for a moment that the announcement of Osama Bin Laden’s death had come four years earlier, while George W. Bush was still president.

Having already used the top-gun carrier landing stunt for his 2003 “mission accomplished” speech, president Bush might have had himself lowered to the announcement scene by cable from a helicopter at one of the more than one thousand US military bases worldwide. With Vice President Dick Cheney hovering at some undisclosed location the president, Bush would declare yet another battlefield victory in the global war on terror. Bin Laden’s body, the president might say, was promptly buried at sea within hours of his death in accordance with Muslim tradition. Minister of Fear Tom Ridge would elevate the national alert level to pale orange. Military and intelligence officials would insist that the killing of Bin Laden proves that “torture works.” At the Pentagon Secretary of War Robert Gates [9], in consultation with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice might advise withholding any photographs of the corpse, and security would be increased at US embassies and installations around the world.

Instead Barack Obama made the announcement solemnly, sternly and alone at the White House. There were no references to “smokin’ him out [10]” or “mission accomplished,” no ridiculous color-coded alerts, nor references to a “war on terror.”  Speaking from an undisclosed location, former vice president Dick Cheney congratulated [11] President Obama, who announced that Bin Laden’s body had been buried at sea shortly after his death, according to Muslim tradition. While Republicans in Congress tweet that “torture works,” military and intelligence officials who ordered and supervised torture such as General Petreaus, are quietly promoted. At the Pentagon, Secretary of War Robert Gates [9], consulting with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton reportedly decline to release photographs [12] of the corpse. Security was increased at US embassies and installations around the world.

The real difference between Republicans and Democrats in a case like this isn’t in how the White House would act. The difference is how rank and file Democrats, the so-called antiwar movement choose to react. If this were 2006 or 2007, many would recall the widespread news reports of Bin Laden’s death back in December of 2001, and the fact that Bin Laden audio or video tapes had a habit of emerging at incredibly convenient times for the Bush administration, like the eve of the 2004 election. Why should a government and military establishment, antiwar activists would wonder aloud, that told hundreds of well-documented lies [13] to get us into Iraq alone be trusted to tell the truth now?

The difference is, those are questions that don’t get asked with a Democrat in the White House. Democrat Barack Obama doesn’t just start with a clean slate. Thanks to the president’s bipartisan and visionary policy of “looking forward, not back” atrocities and crimes of administrations past are forgiven and forgotten, and all the excuses offered for them enshrined as unquestioned historical fact. The Pentagon says they killed Bin Laden in a weekend firefight, won’t show pictures and dumped the body at sea. That’s it and that’s all. Unless another courageous soldier like Bradley Manning comes forth, we’ll never know any different, end of story.

Assuming the official story is mostly true, could Bin Laden have been captured alive and put on trial? Not likely. No matter who was in the White House, the US never had any intention of capturing Bin Laden alive and bringing him to trial. Afghan authorities in the fall of 2001 offered to apprehend and turn Bin Laden in to US officials, if only they were provided with some actual proof he was responsible for 9-11. Bush spurned the offer, preferring to invade and install a new Afghan “government” of feudal warlords, drug smugglers and aid profiteers. The team allegedly sent to kill Bin Laden was not instructed to capture him alive, but to do just what it did. To kill him.

The Afghan war is not not going well, even with a quarter million military, contractors, US officials and mercenaries on the ground spending upwards of $2 billion week. The American public, especially Democrats, don’t support it, and even General Petreaus concedes it cannot be won. If President Obama were the courageous, transformative and visionary leader his worshippers would like to believe, Bin Laden’s reported death would be an opportunity to declare victory and leave. But transformation and courageous vision have never been Barack Obama’s strong suit. This president has already blown many such opportunities.

Remember when the White House controlled, with no congressional oversight whatsoever, the global research, financial resources and manufacturing plants of General Motors? Obama could have ordered it to produce electric cars and trucks, and ordered the Post Office and federal agencies to buy them. He could have made GM produce high speed railcars, or building materials that conserve energy, a real “green jobs” program. Instead, he bailed out the investors, stuck the workers with responsibility for their own pensions, and let GM go back to making the same things the same ways they were making before.

Then there was health care, where Obama in 2005 told audiences first we (Democrats) take the House and Senate, then we take the White House, and then we get single payer health care. Instead we got bailouts for big pharma and private health insurance. There was the reconfiguration of NAFTA and the passage of the Employee Free Choice Act to enable workers to form unions, both of which Obama endorsed in front of key audiences, and flipped on once in office. Whether it’s been Wall Street, “clean coal,” “safe nukes,” a path to citizenship for the undocumented, an answer to black joblessness and foreclosures, or offshore drilling and the Gulf cleanup, the only courage Barack Obama has found is the courage to betray Democratic voters, who will vote for him anyway because he’s not Michelle Bachman.

The killing of Bin Laden, if that’s what it was, and the celebrations around it only ratify and affirm the lies that war, torture and empire are good and necessary, especially when carried out by Democrats.

Bruce A. Dixon is managing editor at Black Agenda Report, and based in Marietta GA. He’s one of the principals of a technology and consulting firm and a member of the state committee of the Georgia Green Party. Contact him at bruce.dixon@blackagendareport.com.

___________________________________________
To breathe the true air of freedom and democracy you need independent media lungs. Staffed with journalists and political observers not beholden to the status quo.
SUPPORT THE GREANVILLE POST AND CYRANOS JOURNAL TODAY.

From Gitmo to the Assassination of Bin Laden

American Savagery

By MIKE WHITNEY | May 4, 2011

What does the assassination of Osama Bin Laden have in common with Guantanamo Bay?

They’re both intended to send a message that the United States has sunk deeper into savagery and abandoned any commitment to conventional norms of behavior. That’s the message, and we hear it “loud and clear”.

We don’t need our Harvard-educated president to crow about his latest gangland “hit” to know that America has turned into a moral swamp. That’s obvious in every area of policy, foreign and domestic. It’s just that certain incidents draw more attention than others, like when a drone incinerates a home full of women and children in the Pakistani outback or when F-16s reduce a city of 300,000 (Falluja) to rubble leaving behind a legacy of birth defects, cancer and grinding poverty. These are the real “headline grabbers”, like shrugging off the sovereign rights of an ally, invading their airspace, and deploying special ops to conduct a Rambo-style massacre in a civilian section of town.

Booyah. You go America! U-S-A, U-S-A, U-S-A.

Everyone knows the rules don’t apply to America. How could they not know? In Libya, the US is supporting a gaggle of fundamentalist crackpots invoking the thinnest rationale of all time, that the leader of the nation (Gaddafi) does not have the right to put down an armed rebellion against the state. What kind of nonsense is that?

But it doesn’t matter, because the US creates the rules on-the-fly; just makes it up as they go along. So, when Bin Laden gets whacked in the latest bloody incident of military gangsterism, no one utters a peep of protest, because everyone knows that the US owns the world and the rest of us are just guests.

So, now that Bin Laden is dead can we withdraw the troops from Afghanistan and allow the Afghans decide their own future? Can we make our apologies to the families of the 1 million Iraqis who were killed in the invasion-occupation of Iraq and move on? Can we stop poking our nose in the internal affairs of every state, on every continent, in every corner of the planet?

Of course not. It’s our planet, isn’t it?

The world deserves a breather from the United States, just a pause in the action. It’s not that everyone hates us; they don’t. They don’t even think about us. They have their own problems to deal with. But the US has become a first class nuisance, like a wasp at the company picnic, constantly buzzing around the potato salad just when people want to sit down to eat. That’s America, one big honking wasp making everyone’s life miserable.

The rest of the world doesn’t share our “enlightened” views about justice. They’re still stuck in the past believing in archaic ideas about due process, habeas corpus, and civil liberties. They don’t see the virtue of kidnapping, beating, and waterboarding. They don’t cheer when people are butchered and dumped at sea. They don’t build Stalinesque gulags and torture chambers to show how forbearing and merciful they are. They’re leaders don’t go through the ritual chest-thumping exercise on national TV when someone’s been assassinated. They don’t understand what a wonderful country the US is. All they just want a little breather from all the violence. Is that too much to ask?

So, here’s a solution that will make everyone happy. Why doesn’t the US plan a short trip, like a 5 or 6 year sabbatical, and give everyone a break. Because–like I said–people don’t hate the US; they’re just weary. You’ve worn us out, America. You’re like the mother-in-law with the booming voice who comes for the weekend and stays for a month. You’ve worn out your welcome. So, just go. It’ll be better for everyone.

Mike Whitney lives in Washington state and  can be reached at fergiewhitney@msn.com

_________________________________________
To breathe the true air of freedom and democracy you need independent media lungs. Staffed with journalists and political observers not beholden to the status quo.
SUPPORT THE GREANVILLE POST AND CYRANOS JOURNAL TODAY.

[donation-can goal_id=’support-tgp-before-were-gone’ show_progress=true show_description=true show_donations=false show_title=true title=”]

____________________________________________

Our colleague Stephen Lendman remains unimpressed by the barrage of
communiqués laying out the official version of events

Osama: Rumor and hearsay underscores his passing through contemporary history

BY STEPHEN LENDMAN

Corporate media manipulators love a big story they can hype, distort and falsify to attract large audiences, unaware they’re getting managed news, not truth.  Moreover, the bigger the event, the worse the reporting, and no matter how often they’re fooled, madding crowds rely on proved unreliable sources like US cable and broadcast TV, as well as corporate broadsheets and popular magazines publishing rubbish not fit to print.

After Obama’s May day announcement, round-the-clock coverage now features “story one” ad nauseam, cheerleading the death of a dead man with no one allowed on to refute it.

A previous article did, accessed through the following link:

http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2011/05/lies-damn-lies-and-bin-ladens-death.html

Separating fact from fiction, it explained:

(1) Significant facts from David Ray Griffin’s important book titled, “Osama Bin Laden: Dead or Alive?” In it, he provided objective and testimonial evidence of his December 2001 death, likely from kidney failure, not a special forces hit squad getting their man then or now.

(2) Forensic evidence that post-9/11 videos and audios were fake.

(3) Bin Laden’s role as a CIA asset, as well as called “Enemy Number One,” using him advantageously both ways.

(4) Also, reports of his 2001 hospitalizations in Pakistan and Dubai where (in July) the emirate’s CIA station chief visited him in his hospital room. Why not if he was a valued asset, his likely status until his natural, not violent, death.

Nonetheless, Western politicians and media, notably America’s, never miss a chance to report fiction, not fact, especially on headline news like bin Laden’s death, a decade after it happened.

Examples of Media Misreporting

Several May 2 New York Times articles provide painful reading, including Mark Mazzetti, Helene Cooper and Peter Baker’s headlined, “Behind the Hunt for Bin Laden,” saying:

“For years, the agonizing search for (him) kept coming up empty. Then last July, Pakistanis working for the (CIA) drove up behind a white Suzuki navigating the bustling streets near Peshawar, Pakistan,” and discovered, after checking its license, that it belonged to his “most trusted courier….”

Claiming he lead them to bin Laden’s location, it said:

“79 American commandos in four helicopters descended on (it). Shots rang out….Of the five dead, one was a tall, bearded man with a bloodied face and a bullet in his head.”

Bin Laden’s manhunt ended, said the writers, when he was identified, then quickly buried at sea to hide the evidence, though under English common law most often, no body means no killing or crime. In other words, without proof, prosecutorial allegations are baseless.

Nonetheless, Mazzetti, Cooper and Baker recounted a decade-long fantasy, including detainee interrogations in secret Eastern Europe prisons, widespread surveillance, wiretaps, satellite images and more before tracking bin Laden to a Abbottabad, Pakistan compound and killing him.

No matter that none of it was true and much more. International and constitutional law prohibit sending uninvited military forces to another country for any reason.

Moreover, no one suspected of any crime may be summarily executed with no arrest, no due process, no no judicial fairness, and no trial. Just a bullet, bomb or slit throat, Washington’s version of summary judgment besides torture and imperial wars as official policies.

These topics were ignored in major media reports, focused solely on killing a decade earlier dead man.

On May 2, Times writers Scott Shane and Robert Worth headlined, “Even Before Al Qaeda Lost Its Founder, It May Have Lost Some of Its Allure,” saying:

Bin Laden had “long been removed from managing terrorist operations and whose popularity with Muslims worldwide has plummeted in recent years,” calling him a “violent extremis(t) without saying he was replaced after his 2001 death so, of course, his influenced waned. Out of sight, out of mind, especially when dead.

A May 2 Times editorial headlined, “The Long-Awaited News,” saying:

“The news that (he’d) been tracked and killed by American forces filled us, and all Americans (sic), with a great sense of relief….(but we must) remember that the fight against extremists is far from over.”

Noting years of painstaking “vigilance and persistence,” it praised Obama for “show(ing) that he is a strong and measured leader. His declaration on Sunday night that ‘justice has been done’ was devoid of triumphalism.”

In fact, he affirmed continuity of America’s war on terror – state terror, including four imperial wars and numerous proxy ones, expending enormous sums while popular needs go begging.

Ignoring truth, he repeated lies endorsed shamelessly by America’s media, notably by Times correspondents, op-ed contributors, and editorial writers with comments like:

“Bin Laden’s death is an extraordinary moment for Americans and all who have lost loved ones in horrifying, pointless acts of terrorism.”

Unmentioned was decades of US and Israeli-sponsored state terrorism responsible for millions of deaths, destruction and human suffering. Earlier, noted scholar/activist Eqbal Ahmad (1934 – 1999) called it:

“illegal violence, (including) torture, (attacking and bombing) villages, destruction of entire peoples, (and) genocide,” adding, “Who will define the parameters of terrorism, or decide where terrorists lurk? Why, none other than the United States, (its leading practitioner) which can from the rooftops of the world set out its claim to be the sheriff, judge and hangman, all at one and the same time.”

So while rhetorically supporting equal justice and democratic values, Washington spurns international and constitutional law, using brute force to assert might over right, all the while proclaiming just cause reasons for its actions.

No wonder Ahmad called America “a troubled country,” sowing “poisonous seeds” globally, saying “(s)ome have ripened and others are ripening (with no) examination of (what they’ve) sown,” adding that “(m)issiles won’t solve the problem.” In other words, violence assures more of it, but don’t expect America’s media to explain.

On May 2, Washington Post writers Greg Miller and Joby Warrick headlined, “Bin Laden discovered ‘hiding in plain sight,’ ” recounting the same fantasy as Times writers, saying:

“The commandos swept methodically through (his) compound’s main building, clearing one room and then another” until they got their man. Sounding more like bad fiction, they said the operation was secretly planned for months, culminating with Sunday’s assault, adding bin Laden wasn’t hiding in a cave after all.

A WP editorial headlined, “Possible consequences of the bin Laden coup,” saying:

“There are multiple reasons to celebrate” his death, including loss of Al Qaeda’s leader, the prowess of US intelligence and military, and that the “prime (9/11) author (finally was) brought to justice.”

It brought “a rare moment of common celebration and relief in a divided America. But (it’s) not clear to what degree al-Qaeda’s operations will be affected by the loss of its leader.” It may, in fact, strengthen its resolve. History shows dead militants often inspire followers.

Ignoring illegal operations on foreign soil, it worried most about ending or curtailing them prematurely, no matter the toll in human life and neglect for popular domestic needs. For now, celebratory joy takes precedence, even for false reasons.

A Wall Street Journal editorial headlined “Victory in Abbottabad,” saying:

Killing bin Laden “doesn’t end the war against Islamic terror (note the racism), but it is a crucial and just victory that is rightfully cause for celebration.”

Ignoring daily US war crimes, including killer drones murdering civilians, it railed against “combatants who hide in the world’s dark corners, who rarely fight in the open and who attack innocents far from any conventional battlefield.”

Praising Obama, it called it “a moment to salute George W. Bush….a vindication of (his war on terror, intelligence, and) interrogation policies,” torturing innocent victims to extract false confessions and information about things they know nothing about, including bin Laden’s alleged whereabouts.

His death, said the writer, “is a measure of justice for the thousands he killed (and) a warning to others who would kill Americans that they will meet the same fate, no matter how long it takes or where they try to hide.”

This and other accounts like it, sadly, is what passes for corporate opinion in America, endorsing state terror and vilifying those against it.

Huffington Post contributor Michael Calderone headlined “Network Anchors Head to Ground Zero for Bin Laden Coverage,” saying:

They never miss a chance to misreport major news, including the three broadcast anchors: NBC’s Brian Williams, ABC’s Diane Sawyer, and CBS’ Katie Couric (an entertainer impersonating a newsperson) “host(ing) an expanded, one-hour May 2 edition of their nightly broadcasts from” Ground Zero.

Several cable channels joined them, including CNN and Fox, reporting fiction about a decade earlier dead man.

Time magazine’s cover story featured bin Laden’s full-page image with a pronounced red X crossing him out, highlighting what didn’t happen to the detriment of readers believing inaccurate reporting.

Al Jazeera was just as bad with stories like one headlined, “Obama says world safer without Bin Laden,” saying:

He “claimed responsibility for planning the September 11 attacks on New York and Washington,” providing no corroborating evidence. In fact, in David Ray Griffin’s  writings, he said:

“(T)here is no good evidence that bin Laden had planned or even specifically authorized the 9/11 attacks.” Those believing it cite his misinterpreted September 2001 Al Jazeera interview, rejoicing in the attacks but denying knowledge or responsibility.

Griffin said one of his aides confirmed that he had “no information or knowledge about the attack(s)” but he “thanked Almighty Allah and bowed before him when he heard this news.” Days later he told Al Jazeera:

“I stress that I have not carried out this act, which appears to have been carried out by individuals with their own motivation.”

During two subsequent October 2001 interviews, he praised the “vanguards of Islam (who) destroyed America,” but again admitted no knowledge or responsibility.

Al Jazeera now claiming it is a lie.

BBC aired the same misinformation as did America’s National Public Radio (NPR) and Public Broadcasting (PBS), calling his death a blow to Al Qaeda. So did Democracy Now, ignoring bin Laden’s decade earlier natural, not violent, death.

Nation magazine editor Katrina vanden Heuvel also swallowed the big lie, headlining her article, “With Osama bin Laden Dead, It’s Time to End the ‘War on Terror,’ ” that was entirely bogus from inception, saying:

“Today, President Obama and his team have a chance to reset our fight against terrorism,” vanden Heuvel not condemning its lawlessness, America’s imperial wars, a president with no credibility, a falsely reported 9/11 event, and that the only relevant terror is what Washington unleashes globally against nonbelligerent nations.

Instead, she praised Obama’s “humane and sober” position, calling it “a relief to hear in his words reminders of” a brief post-9/11 period before America went to war in Afghanistan, then Iraq, undertakings Nation magazine supported at the time and still stops short of rejecting.

A Final Comment

On May 2, Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting’s Peter Hart headlined, “Bush’s Palpable Persistence in Pursuit of bin Laden,” suggesting he stopped looking, knowing he died, quoting him saying in March 2002:

“Who knows if he’s hiding in some cave or not. We haven’t heard from him in a long time….I don’t know where he is. I really just don’t spend that much time on him, to be honest with you.”

Washington Monthly’s Steve Benen offered more evidence of no interest in pursuing him, saying:

“In July 2006, we learned that the Bush administration closed its unit that had been hunting bin Laden,” reported also by New York Times writer Mark Mazzetti on July 4, saying the CIA ceased all efforts last year pursuing him.

Along with David Ray Griffin’s important work, it’s more proof of bin Laden’s 2001 death, putting a lie to Obama’s announcement and shameless journalists repeating it.

STEPHEN LENDMAN lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.

________________________________________
To breathe the true air of freedom and democracy you need independent media lungs. Staffed with journalists and political observers not beholden to the status quo.
SUPPORT THE GREANVILLE POST AND CYRANOS JOURNAL TODAY.

[donation-can goal_id=’support-tgp-before-were-gone’ show_progress=true show_description=true show_donations=false show_title=true title=”]____________________________________________