Usama bin Laden is dead. Or, is he?

To understand the gravity of the title of this blog post, one needs to briefly revisit the attacks onto the United States of America on 9.11.2001.

Two aircraft crashed into the Twin Towers in Manhattan, NY, subsequently sending the towers into collapse, causing the loss of thousands of lives and several more casualties in the wake of the clean up.

At the same time, an aircraft crashed into the Pentagon, causing massive damage to the American military headquarters.

The culprit of the attacks was quickly identified; a terrorist organization, Al-Quaida, headed up by its founder Usama bin Laden. In the wake of the attacks, the US administration vowed to chase this man down, and bring him to justice; in the words of former President Bush: “Dead or Alive”.

10 years later, thousands of lives later, an unwelcome war later, a massive recession later, we seem to have accomplished our goal. …..or have we?

Current President Barack Obama called a late night address to the nation on May 1^st, 2011, announcing that justice had been served. Usama bin Laden was killed in a surgical strike executed by American Special Operations Forces, inside Pakistan. So far, so good; the message has been distributed, most of America is in a state of ecstasy, many feel a sense of closure, and the collective appears to believe that the world had just been made a little piece of heaven.  However, the inquisitive mind wants to look a little closer. (I’m switching the format to a “recap” & “Sniper’s take”.)

Media reports:

Recap:

All major newsoutlets are reporting on the developments involving Al-Quaeda, and Osama bin Laden. While Fox News reported that the deadly attacks were carried out by bombing the compound in question as early as during the last week of April, 2001, CNN and others report that a surgical invasion by a Special Ops team is responsible for the events.

Sniper’s take:

There’s a massive difference between an attack carried out by bombs, and a surgical infiltration team strike. There’s a massive difference in time lines – 7 days, give or take, is a very wide window of opportunity in today’s warfare.

How is it possible that there’s one source of news, the White House, yet news outlets manage to report with vastly different details? There is a strange twist in reporting, and given the magnitude of events, the fundamental differences between reporting agencies is concerning.

Events:

Usama bin Laden had been killed with a clear shot to the head, as a result from a fire fight in a highly secured compound within the city limits of “Abbottabad, about 50 kilometers (31 miles) north of the Pakistani capital of Islamabad.” (CNN)

Leading up to the invasion of the compound was an 8 month long investigation, focusing on a trusted courier of bin Laden. The whereabouts of bin Laden were assumed based on the presence of the courier and his activities at/within the compound. Ultimately, the evidence was enough for President Obama to give the strike order, and watch the events unfold via live link -  welcome to the world of modern warfare.

Sniper’s Take:

We’ve assumed the whereabouts of bin Laden for a duration of anywhere up to 8months. Then we stealth into a secured compound to engage in a fire fight, and shoot him in the head? The logistics behind this event are worthy of a movie script. Wouldn’t it have been easier to conduct the same type of engagement as recently served to Muammar Gadaffi – a precision aircraft strike, laser guided bombs – voila’, job done?

There are only 2 potential reasons I can envision to conduct a surgical ground strike.

1, not to harm any civilians by possible side effects of aircraft strikes with bombs involved.

However, that hasn’t stopped us in Iraq, or Libya. Why would that stop us in Pakistan? At the same rate, today’s bombs are incredibly well guided and rarely miss their mark. Why are we going to the length of sending in special forces, unless we…

2, aim to capture the man alive. Apparently the live capture hasn’t happened, yet we were in possession of the body, which we then conveniently deposed of. More about this below.

No body, just images:

Recap:

So we killed the man. Yet, we have no body, just photos to prove that our claims are actually accurate, and we cut the head of the snake called “Terrorism” off. The president calls a late address, America is in celebratory mood, fireworks are going off; it should be a national holiday. Why don’t we have a body? Because, we disposed of it, in keeping with the Islamic faith of burying an individual within 24hrs of their death.

Sniper’s take:

To begin with, there’s a little ideological problem with this situation. We may(!) have disposed of the leader of a terrorism organization, but by all accounts, the man wasn’t just a leader, he actually stood for something. To his followers, what bin Laden stood for is larger than life. President Obama considered bin Laden a symbol. The simple truth of the matter is; symbols just don’t die. Men who once stood as symbols historically become martyrs. They are considered as individuals who died for the cause. Just because the common member of American society associates a martyr with politically correct figures, doesn’t mean that the evil martyr doesn’t have validity. Where there is one martyr dying, several others aim to take his place to achieve their personal vision of becoming a martyr, carrying on the agenda, etc. What does the USA have to prove to the ones following Osama bin Laden?  It must be going down similar to this: “Sorry guys, we can’t really show you that he’s dead, unless this picture here will suffice? So, yes, don’t aim to become him, or you’ll be a picture soon, too.” What happened to shock & awe? A simple picture isn’t exactly something of shock value to members of a group who capitalize on mayhem, blood and destruction. To them, we’d have to serve a bit more than that.

I think it’s fair to assume that even the members of a terrorism organization know the term “photoshopped”? Look at today’s glamour magazines, nothing’s real. A skilled photoshop artist can whip up a very convincing image in a matter of minutes. Give them more time, and they’ll serve you with an image that looks like absolute reality. Welcome to the world of attribution errors. What you see, may not be what you believe it should be.

Muslim burial

Recap:

He lost the fire fight, got shot in the head, was pronounced dead and we took possession of the body. Then Osama bin Laden’s body was buried at sea according to Islamic law because no country was willing or able to take his body for burial on land, senior Defense officials said.

“When there is no land alternative, Islamic law dictates that the body be buried within 24 hours, and that was the basis,” one official said.” (CNN)

Sniper’s take:

We had the body, then played nice and gave him a quick burial, according to Islamic law. Why? Because, we didn’t want to upset Muslims?

When we invaded Iraq, which is a whole other story itself, we bombed, shot, found, prosecuted, and publicly hanged Hussein. We set an example. We demonstrated that we mean business, no matter whether the business was right and just, we simply showed off that “here hangs an arch enemy of the United States of America”. However, last I remember, Hussein has not sent his army to attack the USA, at least not on American soil. Yet, the much larger threat to the American way of life, Osama bin Laden gets a quick burial, although in the ocean, in keeping with Islamic tradition? I see a massive disconnect here. Terrorists, who undoubtedly have seen more bloodshed than many of us, are trained to inflict harm, cause mayhem, and destruction, are hardly going to be impressed by the American willingness to observe their customs. They play by different rules, or lack thereof, and if we expect an act of courtesy, just because we buried him within 24 hours, then someone needs to look back through time and realize that they have no mercy for us. Of course, I’m not going to leave you hanging just like that. So, here is…

What should have happened:

Osama bin Laden should have been put on display for all his followers to see. Surely, the easy way out by burying him in the ocean, might attract less retaliation and infuriated terrorists. But, at the same time, it gets the message across that “you could be next”. In reality, there is no winning in this argument, but at the very least, seeing more than just an image, would have also given many individuals a sense of true closure.

What’s next?

No recap on that, just the Sniper’s take:

The United States always had some sort of mortal enemy. The position of arch enemy to the way of freedom and life as we know it, was handed around much like a wandering trophy. The Russians, Hussein, bin Laden, etc.

The simple truth is that America needs an arch enemy to function. It’s the evil impersonation that keeps our patriotism flowing in the “right” direction. We pride ourselves in fighting against an adversary, and believe in our mission to bring our flawed system of democracy around the world. We liberate. At the very same time, the fight against the bad element brings us closer together. We refer to our military as the ones fighting to keep us free, to uphold the American way of life. Yet, we haven’t had to fight ourselves free from oppression on our own soil. While I question the entire idea of “fighting for our freedom”, I credit our administration in keeping the illusion going.

We have just disposed of the primary focal point of American hatred. The question is; Who will be the next individual we focus upon? Bin Laden’s #2? Gaddaffi? Keep our focus on the middle east and identify a new target? It may be a long shot, and a bold statement to make, but we might have needed bin Laden for a little while longer, unless we find a placeholder rather quickly.

The conspiracy theory

What if 9/11 was not quite the way it’s made up to be? What if it is indeed a conspiracy between a number of organizations? What if bin Laden played an integral, invited part in it?

Something along the lines of: The US administers the attacks on their own soil to create a shift in public perception, crash markets, create a sense of fear and urgency within our society. There seems to be a recurrent storyline motivated by financial gains, orchestrated by individuals regulating the financial market. While I’m not entirely in line with Michael Moore, there is some rather thought provoking video evidence of the events of 9/11 available. It all boils down to profiteering by use of the most historic form of revenue generation – war. To effectively orchestrate this, we need an independent villain – bin Laden.

What if bin Laden was just a pawn in a much larger play? What if he outlived his usefulness and has now been removed from our society’s “top of mind awareness”? Would we still have to expect retaliation by Al-Quaeda? Or, was the entire terrorist organization, attacks on 9/11 and the Pentagon, just a made up ploy to provide us with a reason to get into Iraq?

After the attacks, we vow to go after him, side swiping Iraq as we establish our dominance in the mid east. Once we eradicated Hussein, who has undoubtedly been a thorn in our side for decades, we continue to stay in Iraq and Afghanistan, and at a set point, we publish the news of finally having succeeded in our actual mission.

Again, it’s a rather farfetched conspiracy theory,…or…is it?

Tags: Abbottabad Al-Quaeda bin Laden killed Pakistan Usama bin Laden