Creepy: Osama bin Laden Home Video

Something ain't right with those photos of Bin Laden that they're starting to show now, they look like other people fixed up to look like Bin Laden.

I just heard a radio show and the guest on the show made it clear that they had Bin Laden on ice since 2001 and that GB-2 was going to use him at the right time to score political points,

but that Madeline Albright had mentioned something about the plan so GB-2 had to drop the plan.

That's why Obama is getting away with this whole scam. They made the whole thing up about Bin Laden, even though there was an actual raid Bin Laden was not there.

If that is what really happened it will be more apparent as more skeptics such as Jerome Corsi research the whoe thing alot more.

I'm not sure about this alternative scenario but I certainly would not put it past them.

Isn't it getting more and more suspicious about the way that they came up with that phoney excuse to bury a man of the desert at sea, because they wanted to follow his religeons; rules, traditions, and customs

???

This way no forensics experts could check out Bin Laden to give a full forensics report.

It's a scam people,

Your being scammed again,

And your biggest enemy the Obamanation is the one who is getting all of the fake-phoney-fraud credit that those above him have set up for him to use.

So that he can continue to serve their short and long term interests-agenda-plot-plans-goals.

Wake up !!!

Munck

another fuckle nutted loon lost in deflect land

arch says


Barack Obama believes he can leverage some of his killing-bin-Laden popularity into new power on Capitol Hill. "It is my fervent hope," the president told a bipartisan group of lawmakers at the White House Monday night, "that we can harness some of that unity and some of that pride to confront the many challenges that we still face."

If the president is thinking about the most contentious issues on the Hill right now -- the budget and the debt ceiling -- he can forget about any new unity. "While the speaker is glad that Osama bin Laden has been killed, it won't affect his relationship [with the president] on any other policy issues," says a spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner. "For example, I don't think anyone is more likely to vote for a debt-limit increase without spending cuts and other reforms because bin Laden is dead."

A spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell for says much the same. Sending along McConnell's remarks from the Biden deficit task force meeting Thursday -- in which McConnell pushed Obama and Democrats to agree to spending cuts -- the spokesman added, "Please note that [McConnell] has not converted to a tax-and-spend liberal."

The fact is, Republican leaders do not believe Obama's victory over bin Laden translates into any greater clout on core issues like the budget. "It's a significant accomplishment, an important accomplishment," says a well-connected GOP strategist. "And Obama gets a boost in terms of this particular accomplishment. But the No. 1 issue in the country is jobs and the economy, and ultimately he's going to be judged by that issue."

There's no doubt Obama is enjoying a boost from bin Laden's death. A new Washington Post poll shows his job approval rating jumping nine points after the news. A New York Times poll shows an 11-point spike. But Republicans believe the president's moment will be brief, and that any increased clout it might bring him will be limited to issues like the war in Afghanistan and other national security matters.

GOP strategists point to December 2003, when President George W. Bush finally tracked down Saddam Hussein in Iraq. Just before that happened, Bush was at 50 percent job approval, according to the Gallup Organization. After Saddam's capture, Bush jumped to 60 percent. Then, a month later, he was at 49 percent, resuming what proved to be a very long slide in popularity.

Of course, by that time the Iraq War, falling into stalemate, was becoming a drag on Bush. But Republicans are also looking at the case of the first President Bush, whose Gallup approval rating was at 53 percent in October 1990, just before the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. Bush's approval soared after he took a strong stand against Iraq, hitting 83 percent in January 1991 and then 90 percent in early March, after U.S. forces won the first Gulf War. After that, it was all downhill. By early May, Bush was at 69 percent. By July, it was 59 percent. By late February 1992, a year after his Gulf War triumph, Bush had fallen to 39 percent.

Republicans believe Obama, whose job approval ratings were in the mid-to-high 40s before bin Laden's death, will be back where he was before long. Therefore, they see no reason to make any special concessions to him on strong GOP issues like the deficit.

But what about the polls that show Obama's numbers improving when people are asked to rate him on attributes like decisiveness and leadership? "Those are interesting discussion points, but ultimately it's about the outcome," says the Republican strategist. "The attributes are secondary to the outcome. Did he fix the economy? Did he get unemployment below a certain percentage? It's great that he's decisive, but look at unemployment and gas prices."

It's an unexpected turnaround in the relationship between Republicans and Democrats. For years, Republicans complained that Democrats did not place enough emphasis on the war on terror; polls through the Bush years showed Democrats caring far less about war-on-terror issues than Republicans. For their part, Democrats charged that Republicans, focused on terrorism, didn't pay enough attention to pocketbook issues.

Now, it's Democrats who are touting a national security concern while Republicans are itching to return to economic issues. The bottom line is that Republicans respect Obama's success in killing bin Laden. But it's not going to mean any new power for the president on Capitol Hill.

Byron York says ...

Arch says

Now what does Bob Munck say? That is the question! Put up or shut up Bob Munck!

arch says

It is incomprehensible how the White House has screwed the pooch in the aftermath of their most spectacular success; the killing of Osama bin Laden.

Incomprehensible because one would have to believe that they discussed the potential fallout from the attack, as well as how they might exploit any political advantage that came their way.

It’s a good bet they talked about what to do in the event of catastrophe - failure to capture OBL, firefights with Pakistani troops, even a helicopter or two shot down by Pakistani air defenses.

It stands to reason that they should have examined issues that have come up in the wake of the raid for which it is painfully obvious the White House was shockingly unprepared to explain. The basic outline of what happened on the ground in Osama’s compound has changed three times by my count. The number of unfriendlies has risen and fallen depending on who is telling the story. Which son died has been changed twice. Which wife was used as a human shield - or not - or maybe yes - or maybe kinda, sorta - has now collapsed into total disbelievability.

They can’t get straight how bin Laden died. They can’t get straight the problem with the helicopter. They can’t agree on whether there was live fire coming from one person, or several, or none.

Agreed, this was a top secret mission, apparently using helicopters that no one has seen before, involving the nation’s most effective, most deadly, and most secret counterterror outfit, and based on intelligence using a combination of gee-whiz technology and brute human brain power. If they are deliberately trying to protect any of that by being obtuse, then they should get a pass.

The administration’s only believable spokesman is soon to be former CIA chief Leon Panetta. Ironically, the reason he’s got credibility is because it is Panetta who has been contradicting much of the administration version of events - not on deep background but in all his quotable glory. Panetta is telling tales out of school, even going so far as to advocate releasing the bin Laden death pictures over what appears to be the objections of a majority within the administration.

Why is Panetta off the reservation ? A purely speculative reason is that Panetta believes his spo oks are getting short shrift from an administration constantly spinning the events to give reflected glory to their chief. The fact is, the SEALs wouldn’t have been needed without some incredible work by our spy agencies. Panetta might think that their story is being pushed into the background in favor of the “boom-boom” narrative of courageous (they were) SEALs busting in the door and with ruthless efficiency, working their way to the third floor to take down Osama.

The 4 years prior to those moments is pretty boring stuff comparatively speaking. The agonizingly slow process of tracking Osama’s courier across the entire expanse of Pakistan and then spending another year focusing on where he was living might not make quite the Hollywood movie as a SEAL assault would, but is an astonishing achievement in its own right. We haven’t heard much about that effort and Panetta could be a little pis sed at that.

Regardless, the question arises; do we really need to know what happened during the assault? There is going to be a lot of information on how they carried out the mission that is classified - as well it should be. But if the White House spokes people can get up in front of reporters and give a falsified or confused blow by blow account of what they say happened in Abbottobad, then the American people have a right to know the truth. And given the absolute dearth of credibility of the administration on this subject, someone has to step up and tell the story in a credible way.

That pretty much leaves it up to an independent commission or at least, a formal, bi-partisan select committee of congress. I don’t think it matters as long as national security is protected and as much of the story that can be told is released - not to squelch any cockamamie conspiracy theories but to present to the American people a plausible account of how this vitally important moment in history occurred.

The administration believed that the American people were owed this account, else they would have kept their mouths shut. If they were trying to show Obama in the most positive light and shaped the story to fit a preconceived narrative - in other words, telling little white lies to buttress the image of their boss - the American people have a right to know this. If confusion and incompetence led to the competing, false, and changing story of what happened, we need to know that too. But most of all, we deserve to know the facts because, like other seminal moments in history, Americans need to catalog and store this event in our national memory.

And the least the government can do is make sure that Osama’s death goes into our national storybook detailing the truth and nothing but the truth.

arch writes,
"It’s a good bet they talked about what to do in the event of catastrophe - failure to capture OBL, firefights with Pakistani troops, even a helicopter or two shot down by Pakistani air defenses."

They ran through every single contingency in this operation.
arch------they created a full scale model of that house OBL was in. They constructed it in Afghanistan, months earlier, and drilled on the operation, day in and day out. This was probably one of the most prepared for assaults ever to have been carried out.

EVERY CONTINGENCY was allowed for. That is why Obama opted for an assault rather than a drone attack which would have obliterated the facility.

"arch says"

Actually, Rick Moran says, arch plagiarizes.

It's almost like the picture of the White House crowd watching the video of the SEALS .........or not.Whatever,Hillary has allergies don't you know.

If you really want creepy, watch Obama's performance on 60 Minutes. It's made for television:

"Obviously, we're going into the sovereign territory of another country and landing helicopters and conducting a military operation. And so if it turns out that it's a wealthy, you know, prince from Dubai who's in this compound -- and, you know, we've sent Special Forces in -- we've got problems," Obama said. "

Obama has an army of straw men stationed all over the world. Obama has a problem with veracity and he will pay the price in 2012 when the American people invade the electoral compound.

Do you promise?

It begins now with me and thee. Spread the word.

In 1999, a bipartisan panel led by Ambassador L. Paul Bremer made more than forty specific recommendations to Congress, including this one, Considering designating Pakistan among foreign governments " not cooperating fully " with United States counter terrorism efforts. The report also said that Pakistan provides safe haven, transit, and moral, political, and diplomatic support to several groups engaged with terrorism. As it happened much of the 9/11 plot was hatched in Pakistan. from the book INFILTRATION, by Paul Sperry, pp. 135,136.

" Mullah Abdul Rashid Ghazi ran some of the largest madrassas for boys and girls in Pakistan. He strongly identified with bin Laden's philosophies and preached to his students that jihad is a basic tenet of the Koran. " from the book They Must Be Stopped by Brigitte Gabriel.

Osama seems to have a lot in common with Obama, narcissism. "had".

Boy the lunacy is just free flowing today for you fellas

LOL!

They just announced the Final Boarding call for the full scale mock up of Air Force One. Better hurry Rachel or you will miss your flight to nowhere. Oh, I forgot. That fake aircraft has already departed and you are on board it along with the other idiots who voted for the creepy Obama. Non-scheduled airlines are like that.

"This is a very complicated issue"
Mistakes were made by the president---not of his own making mind you-----rather a consequence of, and being subjected to, "DIVIDED COUNSEL" from his staff and his cabinet.
You see?

This is simply another example {{{{{holding back the tears}}}} of Obama having been victimized by those around him. Its.....{{{sniff...sniff...}}}...so indicative of all...{{{sniff}}}...he's been made to endure.

"Divided Counsel". I see the makings of a great book in the making.

Division is something hussein thrives on.He has been dividing this country since the day he and his posse took over the White House.It's only a matter of time before it comes full circle and bites him on his a ss.

Tom Donilon:

"The president received, 'DIVIDED COUNSEL".

Translation: Unlike GW Bush, who never received any "DIVIDED COUNSEL", Obama can be excused for any and all mistakes he makes while involving himself with adult issues. In other words, would you rather have him tee off in his 1,798th round of golf, get a gaggle of his hoodrats together for a impromptu hoops game, OR, have to be subjected to all of those diverse opinions from his staff?

See if Herman Cain was POTUS he would make you tell him exactly which toppings you want on your Pizza! That's the kind of leadership the GOP needs!!!!!

Obama is all tomato sauce and no substance; the cardboard packaging is worth more than the cow pie contained within.

Not for nuttin', but i've seen this depiction of obl as a sorta retired leader of terrorism. If that's the case then why the special courier? Was he just sent out to get pizza? Not to mention, obl formally declared war on the United States, then mobilized his forces and attacked. Now, he knows, or should i say knew for one flashing instant where that'll get you.
I will goddarn-gaurantee that al-zwahiri and my fav hate, Adam Gadahn will soon be joining their ol' pal and playmate on the ocean floor and it's coming to a theatre near you soon. Great days ahead, me lads
I do agree with the Col. about where threats to our liberty are located----HEY!! Wait a minute----do ya think maybe-----naw-----we'll do it in Nov. 2012 instead.

Hmmm. Looks like a sad old man trying to relive past glories. Pathetic. While I'm glad he's feeding crabs now, he wasn't much of a threat anymore. The bigger threats to American liberty these days is in Washington D.C.

Not so, Col.

Tom Donilon said, "Usama bin Laden was not just a symbolic leader of Al Qaeda. In fact, he had operational and strategic roles that he was playing."
The information suggests bin Laden played a strong role in planning and directing attacks by Al Qaeda and its affiliates in Yemen and Somalia. And he was apparently determined to strike the United States again.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/05/08/evidence-shows-bin-laden-active-al-qaeda-plotting-government-says/#ixzz1Ln2g6G3u

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/05/08/evidence-shows-bin-laden-active-al-qaeda-plotting-government-says/#ixzz1Ln2DgTaT

Hey Dooooooooooooooofus. No need to link to FoxNews. You can find that same narrative on, ABC News. This morning. On video.

http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/video/interview-tom-donilon-13555752?tab=9482930§ion;=1206874&playlist;=13555957

It's along with all of those other talking heads discussing how incredibly "complicated" this whole situation is---unlike when Bush was in office----way back when it was, "very elementary and fundamental" in nature.

Clarity...i thought everything with Obama was "...perfectly clear?" As soon as i hear a leftie (and isn't that who inhabits the dem party particularly the leadership) say something is complicated, nuanced, a mosaic(their new word love-child)i know it is not and that they are about to proceed with a line of political bs.

He looks like Roman Lion in his momma's basement dreaming carnal dreams of his sisters next visit.In other words Pathetic.

When PatrioticLib sees me bustin' through the swinging doors of The Long Branch Saloon, standing there, eyes squinting, peering through the cigar smoke and dust for enemies of my contry he usually does this; throws in his hand and kinda sidles on out the back door past the latrine to where he keeps his camel saddled and then quietly gets outta town.

Not as creepy as when the full scale mock up of the fuselage of Air Force One was delivered to Invesco Field prior to the democrat convention: http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/08/27/article-0-0258AA6900000578-337_468x228_popup.jpg

Now that is a prime example of creepy.

Some unidentified bearded guy sitting in his room at the Shifty Cot Motel somewhere in Pawk-eeee-stahn watching TV is pretty lame by comparison.

Two things that Obama and Usama had in common - both muslims and both in love with themselves. Just thought of a third both had AMA in tthe spelling of their first names - how cute.

Pathetic nut bucket.....

get away from the mirror, FruitLoopMeister. It refelcts poorly on you.

He was probably watching this administration's tactics on MSM so he could pick up pointers on how to bring down America.

OBAMA'S 19TH LIE ABOUT THE MISSION TO KILL BIN LADIN

Fox News counted 18 lies or "untruths" related to the administrations muddled story about the operation to capture/kill Osama bin Ladin. But there is a 19th lie misssed by Fox, the biggest whopper of them all: the whopper about Obama's canceled authorization to bomb bin Ladin's compound.

Google ApolloSpeaks and read my piece on townhall.com: Why Obama Delayed The Mission To Kill Bin Laden, And His 19th Lie.

WARNING!! I have spent most of the past week in s.e. Oregon in the clear, dry air; refreshing my mind, ruminating in natural hot springs, photograhping some wild horses. BUT! R&R; is over and i'm back defending the Constitution from its enemies both within and without.
Be Advised---no warning shots today.

Were you near Klamath Falls? My brother-in-law is the only conservative there from what I can see.

ClaritySeeker, you nailed it, man, you realy hammered the case shut---good job....rick

rick,
Here's Justice correspondent, Pierre Thomas, this morning, calling this a, "very complicated issue".
He and his MSM ilk are painting this picture now----after assuming a, HYPER-CRITICAL narrative against Bush and his engagements with Pakistan and other countries in that region:

http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/video/death-osama-bin-laden-13555721?tab=9482930§ion;=1206874&playlist;=13555957

PatrioticLib....i'm in here. I suppose by "banality of evil" you are trying to tell us you hold the position that the American Right has over-emphasized bin Laden's evil nature or perhaps even dreamed it up? (folks, this is rick...it's sometimes difficult to determine just what the mis-named poster i'm speaking to means because he tries oh, so very hard to fit in phrases and words meant to impress us and he usually answers with somethint th...oh forget it...and now, back to the ranch).
Sorry about the editorializing PatLib. So, could you help me out----is that what you're saying? thanks

Rick...Platitudinus Lib'rulus hasn't--as usual--the slightest clue on what the "banality of evil" refers. It was Hannah Arendt's famous description of Adolf Eichmann. Go home, kiss the wife, scuffle with the kids, pet the dog, sleep soundly and get up, eat a hearty brekfast and go to work: At the RSHA-HQ on Prinz Albrechtstrasse and arrange trains of innocents for Auschwitz, Treblinka, Belzec, Maidanek, etc.

Blovius Maximus(PL)is a study in the Banality of Vapid Self-Regard.

right

ERIK? ERIK! Calm down, my friend. Most of us know that but most conservatives can shoot with both hands, too and HEY? Don't we deserve a little fun with obl being righteously slain by an American sailor?

Clarityseeker you nailed it down.

Uh, yeah, SURE HE DID!

LOL!

Ahhh. It's Val.

Back with her brilliant prose. I'd know it anywhere.

Back with more pinpoint, cutting edge commentary.

Her perceptive mind at work. AGAIN.

WHAT............A................GAL!