Exploring the evidence for Bin Laden conspiracy (part 1)

[bishop]

So I've gotten the go ahead to create a thread dedicated solely to a discussion of the evidence regarding the truth on Bin Laden. I'd like to use Alex's discussion with James as a launching point.

Just a couple quick ground rules. Let's please stay focused on reaching conclusions based on the specific data, and not let the discussion slip away into classic proponent/skeptic generalizations. Also, if you're going to make a case please do more than simply posting a link to some conspiracy/skeptic site with pages and pages of bulleted lists to sift through. Let's all try to be as crisp as possible in our arguments and bring something substantive with each post.

Lastly, you'll notice I put "part 1" in the title. I'd like to begin by discussing one point at a time, and see where it goes. If we can't find common ground on one single point I'm not sure we need to continue. I don't want this thread to turn into a morass of nebulous arguments on either side.

Thanks.

[bishop]

The blackout

Corbett leads with a seemingly strong hit to Obama and his cabinet.

It’s black and white that there were various aspects of the Osama Bin Laden raid that were demonstrable lies coming out in the hours after that raid.

So for example, it occurred on the 1st of May, 2011 and immediately there was a narrative created that was bolstered in no small part by the image of Obama and Clinton and others in the White House taking a look at presumably the live video footage of the raid itself. But that was contradicted just three days later on the 4th of May by the fact that there was a blackout during the time of the raid. So there was no visual footage.

This is no small accusation. If it’s true, the implications are obvious. But when you dig into the facts, it becomes clear that Corbett is way off base. To understand why he is wrong, I will show the flow of information which must have led to his conclusion.

First off, did anyone else think he was talking about an electrical blackout? Like the strategy room actually lost power or something? If that is what he meant, then his misunderstanding is even deeper and more bizarre than I thought.; there is no evidence, anywhere, that there was an actual blackout in the strategy room or elsewhere. I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he is talking about the following headline, which spread like wildfire across all conspiracy media outlets.

The head of the CIA admitted yesterday that there was no live video footage of the raid on Osama bin Laden's compound as further doubts emerged about the US version of events.

The article also states:

Leon Panetta, director of the CIA, revealed there was a 25 minute blackout during which the live feed from cameras mounted on the helmets of the US special forces was cut off.

This information is a skewed version of the truth, spun in a way that I believe is maliciously designed to sew seeds of doubt.

Here is the exact quote from Leon Panetta from his interview with Jim Lehrer:

Once those teams went into the compound, I can tell you that there was a time period of almost 20 or 25 minutes where we - you know, we really didn't know just exactly what was going on. And there were some very tense moments as we were waiting for information. But finally, Adm. McRaven came back and said that he had picked up the word "Geronimo," which was the code word that represented that they got bin Laden.

Furthermore, from the same interview he explains what the president and his cabinet did see. Here is the full interaction.

JIM LEHRER: What about at the White House situation room where President Obama was? Did he have any - was he seeing anything, any actual time, real-time action going on as well?
LEON PANETTA: I think they were viewing some of the real-time aspects of this as well in terms of the intelligence that we were getting.
JIM LEHRER: So do you think the - did the president see the shots fired at Osama bin Laden?
LEON PANETTA: No. No, not at all. I think we - you know, we saw from, you know, some of the operations that we knew that the helicopters had - were on the ground, that the teams were going into the compound. And that was the kind of information that we were following.
Once those teams went into the compound, I can tell you that there was a time period of almost 20 or 25 minutes where we - you know, we really didn't know just exactly what was going on. And there were some very tense moments as we were waiting for information. But finally, Adm. McRaven came back and said that he had picked up the word "Geronimo," which was the code word that represented that they got bin Laden.

Full interview:
CIA Chief Panetta: Obama Made 'Gutsy' Decision on Bin Laden Raid | PBS NewsHour | May 3, 2011 | PBS

Panetta neither mentions a “blackout”, or claims there was “no video”. It would seem from all outward appearances that Corbett is simply restating the headline without actually researching the facts.

How to you get from those above headlines and PBS interview to Obama faking the strategy rooms pictures and not killing Bin Laden? It’s a spurious leap.

So where is the conflict exactly? My research led me to only two media sources that claimed that Obama actually saw Bin Laden killed, and neither cites any sources or features any official quotes. This is not a minute point: out of all media outlets in the world, only two reported that Obama ACTUALLY SAW the killing.

1. The Sun
Obama can’t hide Bin Laden relief | The Sun |News
.
2. The Daily Mail

Osama bin Laden dead: Photo of Obama watching the Al Qaeda leader die on live TV | Mail Online

What aggravates me so much about the Sun headline is that it looks like a quote: “Watched him die”. It is not a quote. I searched extensively, and unless someone can point me to a source I’m convinced the author just made the headline up whole cloth. It is completely misleading.

If this is the jumping off point for evidence of a conspiracy, it doesn’t seem like a strong one.

I'm welcome to any new information or corrections.

[segovius]

Hilary Clinton:

"We could see or hear nothing when they (the Navy SEAL team) went into the house. There was no communication or feedback coming, so it was during that time period everyone was particularly focused on just trying to keep calm and keep prepared as to what would happen, and we got the word that they thought they had killed bin Laden."

Link

So either by design or accident there WAS a blackout of the action during the crucial part of the mission and it resulted in the Staffers at the White House not seeing the actual incidents around the alleged killing.

This raises several questions and possibilities but we can probably best enumerate these later.

I would like to address the first point the OP makes taking on Corbett's use of the word 'lies'. It is indeed a strong accusation but it raises a point that I think is key. Ever since the Bush admin - and Obama continues this, Tony Blair was also a master - there has been employed a practice which one might term "Telling lies without lying".

It goes like this:

• Torture occurs
• Torture is renamed 'Enhanced Interrogation" or some such
• Reports of torture leak out
• Politicians can then sincerely stand up and say "We do not torture"

And people believe them. Which is the point. Because they are not quite lying are they? Skeptics do this all the time too. And it happened here. I would say the famous photo of Hilary Clinton in shock looking at the TV monitors was pushed (along with appropriate captions and headlines) to convey to the public that she WAS watching the bin Laden killing. This is clear from the context and her later remarks even though, as you point out, she was not watching such for whatever reason.

So what we know re this Point #1 (see link above):

1) The team in the WH watched live footage of the raid for 35-37 minutes

2) When the Seals went into the house this ceased to all intents and purposes - 'We could see or hear nothing....there was no communication or feedback"

3) The actual raid only lasted for about the time stated by Clinton. But it was ALL recorded:

CBS News national security correspondent David Martin reports the 40 minutes it took to kill bin Laden and scoop his archives into garbage bags were all recorded by tiny helmet cameras worn by each of the 25 SEALs.

Link

So either the feed was (1) deliberately turned off OR (2) coincidentally went off but only for the time of the killing OR (3) Clinton is lying OR (4) there was no feed in the first place. There are no other possibilities.

In a way it does not matter which one of those you choose to believe as there is not one of them which 'fits' and which disproves a conspiracy - quite the contrary. I would argue that (1) is prima facie evidence of something untoward, (2) is possibly the safest option but highly unlikely, (3) & (4) would be evidence of conspiracy.

[bishop]

The quote by Hillary Clinton corroborates what Panetta said.

Clinton:

"We could see or hear nothing when they (the Navy SEAL team) went into the house. There was no communication or feedback coming, so it was during that time period everyone was particularly focused on just trying to keep calm and keep prepared as to what would happen, and we got the word that they thought they had killed bin Laden."

Panetta:

JIM LEHRER: So do you think the - did the president see the shots fired at Osama bin Laden?

LEON PANETTA: No. No, not at all. I think we - you know, we saw from, you know, some of the operations that we knew that the helicopters had - were on the ground, that the teams were going into the compound. And that was the kind of information that we were following.

Once those teams went into the compound, I can tell you that there was a time period of almost 20 or 25 minutes where we - you know, we really didn't know just exactly what was going on. And there were some very tense moments as we were waiting for information. But finally, Adm. McRaven came back and said that he had picked up the word "Geronimo," which was the code word that represented that they got bin Laden.

We don't need to make assumptions people saw in the strategy room, or why they didn't have access to the raid itself. There is no conflicting or contradictory information. No official sources have made the claim that Obama or any members of his staff saw Bin Laden killed live.

[bishop]

Hi Alex,

I was just wondering if you have any feedback on my initial post on the "Blackout". I know you feel strongly about this stuff, and I'd like to you know what you think about this particular piece of evidence put forward by Corbett.

Do you think it holds water?

[alextsakiris]

Originally Posted by bishop

Hi Alex,

I was just wondering if you have any feedback on my initial post on the "Blackout". I know you feel strongly about this stuff, and I'd like to you know what you think about this particular piece of evidence put forward by Corbett.

Do you think it holds water?

not sure I get your point about the "blackout"... seems to me Corbett's point about them changing the story is a good one. no less than Bob Woodward from the Washington Post reported:

"In the White House Situation Room on Sunday night, the president and his national security team watched a soundless video feed of the raid."

Death of Osama bin Laden: Phone call pointed U.S. to compound — and to ‘the pacer’ - The Washington Post

but why believe any of this story??? that's the point I was making, and the connection to Skeptiko stuff. the US government already has a pretty bad track record of psyop tricks, so we all need to be suspicious of this kind of stuff, but this case was over-the-top. Keep in mind that they provided no evidence to back up their claims... no photos (other than old faked ones they scrambled to disassociate themselves from), no DNA, no independent meidal examination... really nothing... certainly nothing like what we we ask from any government that made such a claim. then we have all the strangeness/unbelievable-ness surrounding the story they put out. there were a lot of warning flags here... yet the story ran, and ran, and continues to run:
Biden: Bin Laden is dead, General Motors is alive

[bishop]

Originally Posted by alextsakiris

not sure I get your point about the "blackout"... seems to me Corbett's point about them changing the story is a good one. no less than Bob Woodward from the Washington Post reported:

"In the White House Situation Room on Sunday night, the president and his national security team watched a soundless video feed of the raid."

Death of Osama bin Laden: Phone call pointed U.S. to compound — and to ‘the pacer’ - The Washington Post

but why believe any of this story??? that's the point I was making, and the connection to Skeptiko stuff. the US government already has a pretty bad track record of psyop tricks, so we all need to be suspicious of this kind of stuff, but this case was over-the-top. Keep in mind that they provided no evidence to back up their claims... no photos (other than old faked ones they scrambled to disassociate themselves from), no DNA, no independent meidal examination... really nothing... certainly nothing like what we we ask from any government that made such a claim. then we have all the strangeness/unbelievable-ness surrounding the story they put out. there were a lot of warning flags here... yet the story ran, and ran, and continues to run:
Biden: Bin Laden is dead, General Motors is alive

Here is the only salient question.

Are the two following quotes enough to deduce, as all conspiracy outlets have, that Obama and his senior staff faked strategy room pics and lied about Bin Laden? Because that is what is happening. The entire "blackout" thing is based solely on this one single quote.

Panetta

Once those teams went into the compound, I can tell you that there was a time period of almost 20 or 25 minutes where we - you know, we really didn't know just exactly what was going on. And there were some very tense moments as we were waiting for information. But finally, Adm. McRaven came back and said that he had picked up the word "Geronimo," which was the code word that represented that they got bin Laden.

Woodward

In the White House Situation Room on Sunday night, the president and his national security team watched a soundless video feed of the raid.

What about the time before the team went into the compound? What about the chopper landing? What about everything else that Obama and his staff could be watching/listening to? Is there seriously nothing else that Obama and his staff could have possibly been doing when that picture was taken?

Can you explain clearly exactly what the conflict of information is, and how it can lead to the deduction that Obama lied about the raid and faked the pictures?

[alextsakiris]

Originally Posted by bishop

Can you explain clearly exactly what the conflict of information is, and how it can lead to the deduction that Obama lied about the raid and faked the pictures?

I think I did... but looks like we're not going to bridge any gaps here.

[bishop]

Originally Posted by alextsakiris

I think I did... but looks like we're not going to bridge any gaps here.

We may not, but we certainly did with Obama's birth certificate.

I just want to understand clearly what the argument is about the blackout, because as far as I see it it's a real stretch.

It's fine if we don't make any ground, but you can at least tell me what the conflict is?

[Arouet]

Was listening to talk radio on my drive in and the hosts briefly discussed this issue. When one of the hosts commented the same concerns that we've been discussing here - that the photos were never disclosed - one of the other hosts jumped in and said that some of the photos are out there in the interwebs, that he'd seen them and that they were indeed quite gruesome (the kind of thing you can't "unsee"). Haven't decided if I want to bear that or not, but has anyone heard about this? Are some of the photos out there?