Thursday 28 February 2013

Weight & Paperweight: Osama-Benghazi

Consider how well we know the group that went in to kill Osama Bin Laden, Seal Team 6. The photo of Obama watching on video as the killing of Bin Laden takes place, everyone in a seat, all the players we'd expect there, the appearance of a long pursued effort coming to fruition. Yet we never see a body, we are told Bin Laden's religious beliefs were upheld in burying him at sea. Of course many details left out, someone from Hollywood makes a movie about the whole thing, even releasing it before the November 2012 elections.

Celebrations galore, even republicans (some of which are slightly Conservative), concede that Obama has done a great service for America, for the world, in killing the ultimate person behind 911.

Ignored, is that if these had been the facts for George Bush catching Bin Laden, or any Republican President (haven't had a truly Conservative one for a very long time) the following would have occurred:

1) Daily KOS, Huffington Post, and others, would have been citing someone explaining how this is abnormal, followed by explanations of the vehicles that left the ship, explaining which ones could have held enough security personnel, and then, finally, saying outright that it appears Osama Bin Laden's death was faked so that the CIA could waterboard him with no one worrying about his civil rights.

2) The same publications would be railing against George Bush for failing to have an international force to get Bin Laden, then explaining how we had no right to be in Pakistan. Some of these would publish lists of the names of the soldiers on Seal Team 6, hoping banks and others would deny services to them for having fooled the American People into thinking Bin Laden is dead and proving that our military is just a bunch of thugs, hired guns for the wealthy elite who made sure Bin Laden was blamed anyway because 911 was an inside job. In fact, this last “fact” would have come up in the efforts under “1” above, to explain how the whole thing is a lie, but here it would be the idea “we killed an innocent person, claiming it to be the body of Bin Laden.”

3) Questions would be brought, couched in perfect “gotcha” fashion, in absolute suspicion of the Republican administration and everyone in government who doesn't overtly (by party) represent the Progressive view every time any of them appeared on a political talk show in the organized broadcast media for the next 3-6 months, even a year. Chris Matthews would explain how wrong it was to kill Bin Laden due to the useful information we could have gotten out of him, only to then take that back with a “well at least he escaped Cheney's torture...(orchestrated intentional pause achieving dramatic effect as a break in cadence, coinciding with a few chews of his gum and appearing to lean down slightly as though scratching a leg tingle)...waterboarding.” And everyone who was for the death of Bin Laden would be fighting with those who were arguing every jot and tittle of what was reported with suspicion of every word. Some would argue “the death of one more doesn't bring back the 3000 who died 9-11-2011.”

Yet, instead, because a Socialist President with Communist Dictatorial Leanings killed Bin Laden we have a celebrated execution, though wrongfully celebrated. The death of Bin Laden was not celebrated because he was an enemy to the American People, to Freedom and what America stands for, to our way of life and all that we hold dear, to our government even, but because Bin Laden's death at the hand of Obama would, by this sensationalism, become the event impossible to be used in a negative way due to this overwhelming barrage of coverage of it in relation to Barack Obama, showing his intense involvement via the photos of his watching the last minutes, some records indicating Obama went against his staff's recommendations – how quaint....And how dramatically convenient.

I get away with saying all this for the simple fact of 9-11-2012 (of how little is known of what happened on the ground, how the records are kept from us unless discussed in negotiating the ratification of the President's cabinet members, not because Republicans are mixing things up but because a President who cannot find the same glamorous storyline available in any way regarding what he didn't do, how Benghazi was a half-hour meeting because he had a Presidential Campaign) cannot be swept under the rug entirely because the very media that sold us on the death of Bin Laden can't even spin the death of 4 Americans on foreign soil as “a great feat of Barack Obama,” especially when the stories from the beginning are replete with fabrications absolutely inconsistent with what facts we do know about what happened.

Bin Laden is a story of political weight, Benghazi, a story of political paperweight, when viewed in their affect on the outcome of Obama's re-election. Don't believe it? Get a pad and paper and write down the 10 things you absolutely know about the death of Osama Bin Laden on the left, and then the 10 things you absolutely know are true about Benghazi on the right (excluding Petraeus affair) and the clarity of how our knowledge of both incidents was determined by political weighing and nothing else will be more than obvious, unless of course you don't care if your government is denying you your right to know all of what your tax dollars are paying for.

I mean, that is the “pro” argument for when something like waterboarding or an Abu Ghraib is brought to light, but seems to be the argument conveniently ignored by the very same people who would say we should know everything. “Pro” when a Republican, particularly a Conservative one, is in office, but ignored when Bill Clinton was doing rendition, or had implemented Echelon, and now ignored again under Barack Obama, irrespective of accumulating 75+% deficit totals in 4 years of George Bush's 8, and an easy $1.5 to $2.5 trillion per year in excess of what Bill Clinton (with the help of Newt Gingrich) accomplished in his last year.

Imagine if the media were honest enough to compare Democrat presidents in a row, though we must remember Bill Clinton had 19 opportunities to kill Bin Laden before 9-11-2001 and never took the shot, maybe he, as demonstrated by Clinton's taking leadership seriously and working with Gingrich, wasn't as concerned about the political weights as Obama ALWAYS is.

Osama-Benghazi answers this question, particularly combined with a President who never scolds Harry Reid for filibustering the entire 435 members of the House by not taking up even one bill they pass since 2010... But of course, that's the Republicans, the Tea Party, FoxNews, and talk radio's fault right?

Thank you for reading,

Toddy Littman

printer friendly create pdf of this news item

News Categories