Hello Peter, as I read through your comments I found that I couldn't agree more and evidently there is a lot of skepticism from around the world and here at home. What a great article by Atlas Shrugs you have brought us. And then you have those who can see no farther than the nose on their face and who want to give this fake and fraud all the credit.
I receive emails daily from the Canada Free Press and this one is especially timely.
President Bush’s policies
Wrong President Getting Main Credit for Locating bin Laden
By Aaron I. Reichel, Esq. Tuesday, May 3, 2011
President Obama’s first Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, set the tone for the president’s administration when he said, in an interview November 9, 2008, shortly after the election that brought him to power, “Never allow a crisis to go to waste.” This approach, of course, enabled the Obama administration to take advantage of the economic crisis to create a trillion dollar “stimulus” plan to reward his backers and set back true economic recovery, and to nationalize, to some extent, the banking industry, the auto industry, and health care.
If Emanuel and the president can milk adversity so effectively, imagine what the president and his current advisors can do with success. The American people did not have to imagine what President Obama could do with success. They saw it and heard it when the president delivered his speech to the world upon the killing of the world’s most notorious villain. There is no question that President Obama deserves a lot of credit for his effectiveness in repeatedly claiming an undue amount of credit where only very limited partial credit is due (not to mention removing creditor status from all too many people to whom it used to be due).
At the time this is being written, it appears clear to everyone that the courier whose identity led to the discovery of bin Laden’s last lair appears to have been identified only because of the use of interrogation techniques approved by President Bush and his predecessors, and disapproved and discontinued by President Obama and his supporters. It’s true that the trigger was pulled on Obama’s watch, but its target was located only because of President Bush’s policies.
It has also already come to light that the first breakthrough in solving this case came about in 2006, again on President Bush’s watch, and there would have been nothing to watch in Pakistan this year had the first breakthrough not been attained, not only because of President Bush’s policies but because it came about on his watch, as well.
The Navy SEALs who sealed the deal were highly trained, and certainly not novices. If they were highly trained, most of the training of most of them presumably took place in and under the policies set forth and implemented in the Bush administration.
In the 15 lines of the transcript of President Obama’s victory speech notifying the world of bin Laden’s killing, beginning with the passage about Obama’s direction to the head of the CIA until the passage about taking custody of bin Laden’s body, Obama referred to himself no fewer than seven times, once virtually every other line, with five times “I” and two times “my.” His entire speech contained only a single reference to President Bush, the true hero of the War on Terror, and even then it was only parenthetically that President Bush has also made it clear that our war is not against Islam. In fact, President Obama hasn’t even been able to articulate to whom the war is against – terror – and forbids the people working under him to acknowledge the enemy, let alone to fight the enemy as effectively as possible, considering that interrogation techniques under Obama have been watered down to eliminate water boarding and other proven effective methods of getting at the truth, and, ultimately, at the enemy.
The president proved to be almost supernatural in his ability to generate support among his collegiate colleagues, even when natural expressions of support would have been forthcoming anyway. According to Sunlen Miller, in a dispatch on behalf of ABC News that appears to have been clocked at 11:40 P.M. May 1st (note the timing), Miller’s headline was “Osama bin Laden’s Death Leads to Spontaneous Celebration in front of the White House.” The first sentence of the dispatch is very telling: “As the President began his statement announcing the death of Osama bin Laden inside the White House, a large crowd of people… had gathered outside the White House gates on Pennsylvania Avenue, waving flags and dancing.” If his surprise bombshell speech first began at 11:35 P.M., isn’t it intriguing that a crowd would have gathered “[a]s the President began,” and that they would have suddenly been spontaneously generated equipped with flags for the occasion? Many pseudo-liberals doubt that G[o]d Almighty could create the world in six days (although sophisticated creationists have found many ways to reconcile the Biblical account with many scientific findings, which combined are much more rational than the belief that a world as complex as our evolved by random means), and believe the world took millions of years to evolve, but they have no trouble believing that hundreds of students appeared ex nihilo, out of nothing, equipped with flags, fully revved up to celebrate an event that was virtually totally unknown outside of the White House moments before.
Gathering of the mysterious crowd
Somehow this crowd mysteriously appeared at a strategic location on Pennsylvania Avenue to focus attention on the role of the present occupant of the White House, rather than the roles of the seals in training or the soldiers in the field or of all of the other people whose specific contributions and personal heroism actually helped make this event possible and gave the commander in chief the opportunity to say “okay.” Only later in the evening did true grass-root gatherings form, especially in the vicinity of Ground Zero and Times Square, where the focus was on the history of the events that led up to this evening’s festivities.
In Obama’s speech, he managed to take credit for “[t]he death of bin Laden” as “the most significant achievement to date in our nation’s effort to defeat al Qaeda,” completely ignoring the uprooting of all of the Taliban and al Qaeda people from leadership positions in Afghanistan, the elimination of countless cells throughout Afghanistan, the elections in Afghanistan, the many enemy combatants killed in Afghanistan, and all of the intelligence gained from the captives in Guantanamo Bay and elsewhere throughout the world, enabling this evening’s announcement to become virtually inevitable. Almost all of these events, and many more, were achieved, of course, on the watch of Obama’s predecessor, who was granted only one parenthetical mention at one point in his successor’s self-promoting speech, as indicated above.
It is interesting to note the president’s claim that “counterterrorism cooperation with Pakistan helped lead us to bin Laden and the compound,” even though we all now know that this compound should have been known to and suspected by the Pakistanis for years prior to the Obama administration’s epiphany, which presumably came about as a result of the interrogation techniques discussed earlier.
Obama administration, condemning collateral damage and Israel
It is also interesting to note that the Obama administration joins the chorus of liberals in condemning collateral damage when Israel defends itself by shooting at the sources of the rockets and missiles coming from the Gaza that the Israelis generously donated to the terrorists, and Palestinians use their women and children as human shields, yet Obama’s men had no problem shooting at Osama even though it has been reported that this revolutionary “hero” and role model reputedly used one of his wives as a human shield when the Americans came with their guns blazing, and the Americans shot at him anyway (with full justification, most people believe).
[Author’s follow-up note: Although authoritative sources originally reported that Osama used one of his wives to shield himself from the attempts to kill him, subsequent reports indicate this was not the case; however, the main point remains that there was collateral damage to civilians in the operation (to the extent that people who chose to be present in Osama’s compound could be deemed civilians) that terminated in the termination of Obama and his atrocities, so that critics of Israeli policies of retaliation for premeditated and intentional acts of terrorism notwithstanding the possibility of unintended collateral damage who simultaneously defend Obama’s authorization of comparable retaliation for premeditated and intentional acts of terrorism despite the possibility of unintended collateral damage are now exposed for their further hypocritical double standard.]
Somehow or other, when Obama closed his self-serving presentation with a reference to a nation “indivisible, with liberty and justice for all,” it seemed to have a hollow ring to it in light of Obama’s repeated vilification of and blame on his predecessors for most of the nation’s ills, his attempts to nationalize at least partly some of our main industries, and his blatant bribes by spending “stimulus” money on rewards to the groups and unions that voted for him, and his blatant outrageous and anti-democratic “exemptions” to his glorious health care program for many of these same groups and unions that make it clear that they do not consider his health care program to be set up to enable them to thrive, even though they are among the most enthusiastic to impose the responsibility on other people to fund “universal health care.”
I of course join those who are pleased that justice has been brought to bear on bin Laden. I only hope that President Obama will begin to allow the benefits of justice, freedom, and free markets to serve the honest working citizens of our great country.
Aaron I. Reichel, Esq.
Source: http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/36108Aaron I. Reichel, Esq., a member of the Federal and State Bars in New York and New Jersey, is the author of Fahrenheit 9-12 – Rebuttal to Fahrenheit 9/11, a moderate and reasoned response to critics of some significant policies of the prior Republican ticket. Quote:
Hello Friends,I just posted this in my HSIG thread and thought it should be here too. Shalom, Peter
Quote:
Hello Friends,
For the past few days I've been having conflicting thoughts about the Bin Laden take out. On the one hand I felt it was contrary to everything we know about B Hussein and that he really didn't want to have Bin Laden killed. Think about his actions or lack of actions in regard to Iran who's been b*itch slapping him ever since he fraudulently took over the office of President of the United States. His lack of action against Assad who's killing protesters throughout Syria (Iran's partner in the axis of evil). His ridiculously pro Palestinian "peace initiatives". His lack of action against Hezbollah and Hamas. And now Hamas and the PLO's El Aqsa brigade joining in the b*itch slapping with their anti American remarks about the Bin Laden killing. His ridiculous decisions against Mubarak that will bring about another Iran. Those who will say but look at Libya and I'll answer another bad decision and one that Hillary Clinton forced him into. There are many more examples but these are all well known and recent enough for many to remember and finally understand that B Hussein loves radical Islam and really didn't want to take Bin Laden out. These were my gut feelings.
On the other hand I felt this was a convenient "take out" in order to take attention away from his fraudulent long form COLB + all the info in BHO Senior's immigration files.
In the end my gut feeling told me that the first option was most probably the real scenario and the below article I believe proves that. This man's Muslim agenda is almost as important to him as ruining America and in actual fact work hand in hand. They fit well together like a well fitting glove.
One of the things that bothered me was the statements we heard that a window of opportunity all of a sudden opened up. With military actions of this sort the intelligence is gathered and plans are made with different options. So my understanding was that Bin Laden could have been taken out earlier then the actual attack and that in a way fit well with the feeling I had about the convenience of the attack as a cover up for the fraudulent long form COLB. But I still held with my gut feeling and the below article supports that.
You know when I first saw the photo of him in the situation room watching the attack live the first thing I noticed was he's not at the head of the table and the second was the whipped dog look on his face. My original thought was his despair at Bin Ladens being taken out and then after reading the article it's so much worse.
I really pity those who still support this fraud cos when they eventually realize their demi God is an enemy of the country they claim to love they'll go into a real funk and all the meds in their medicine chest won't solve their problems. You'll really have to appreciate Rush Limbaugh's satiric remarks (after reading the below article) that they apparently didn't understand and posted as pro B Hussein and then ........... DELETED after being told what he really meant.
In any case after reading the below article over at Atlas Shrugs I find that B Hussein is really much worse then I previously thought and I thought very little of him from day one. He's being led by the nose by Valerie Jarret and others of her ilk. This fraud has gotta go and the sooner the better.
Shalom,
Peter
As Obama continues to politicize and mine the takedown of Osama Bin Laden and the outrageous "Islamic burial" that followed, new details emerge of his reluctance and refusal to sign off on the mission. It is the height of hypocrisy and crass opportunism to draw out the release of the death photos so as to prolong the news cycle on the story, and to neglect the tornado-ravaged parts of the country -- instead, Obama campaigns at Ground Zero on Thursday for an "O-victory lap," while it appears that in fact Obama had to be dragged kicking and screaming to the OBL operation. The story that follows is deeply disturbing, but hardly surprising. When news broke that Obama rejected bombing the complex last month, one had to wonder why. It was reported that Obama feared collateral damage, despite being assured that the walls of the complex were high enough so that no civilians would be killed. Instead, he risked losing Americans in a mano-a-mano raid. A reluctant American president who was ultimately overridden by senior military and intelligence officials to finally take out terrorist Osama Bin Laden… Ulstermann (hat tip CO) Note: This communication came from our long time D.C. Insider and details previous and ongoing conflicts surrounding the decision to assassinate terrorist Osama Bin Laden. This has been reproduced here as originally communicated to us. __________ Please get this out ASAP. Want specific people to know we know. RE Osama Bin Laden. Significant push to take him out months ago. Senior WH staff resisted. This was cause of much strain between HC and Obama/Jarrett. HC and LP were in constant communication over matter – both attempted to convince administration to act. Administration feared failure and resulting negative impact on president. Intel disgusted over politics over national security. Staff resigned/left. Check timeline to corroborate. Now Intel already leaking to media facts surrounding how info obtained. Namely from enhanced interrogation efforts via GITMO prisoners. Obama administration placed in corner on this. Some media aware of danger to president RE this and attempting protection. Others looking for further investigation. We are pushing for them to follow through and already meeting with some access.Point of determination made FOR Obama not BY Obama. Will clarify as details become more clear. Very clear divide between Military and WH. Jarrett marginalized 100% on decision to take out OBL. She played no part. BD worked with LP and HC to form coalition to force CoC to engage. IMPORTANT SPECIFIC: When 48 hour go order issued, CoC was told, not requested. Administration scrambled to abort. That order was overruled. This order did not originate from CoC. Repeat – this order did not originate from CoC. He complied, but did not originate. Independent military contacts have confirmed. Stories corroborate one another. This is legit. The killing of Osama Bin Laden was in fact a Coup within Obama WH. Speaking with additional contacts RE info. Stay safe. ________________ HC = Hillary Clinton BD = Bill Daley LP = Leon Panetta CoC = Chain of Command/Commander in Chief UPDATE: JUST RELEASED PHOTO OF THE WHITE HOUSE “WAR ROOM” DURING THE OSAMA BIN LADEN ASSASSINATION OPERATION SHOWING A SEEMINGLY ANGRY BARACK OBAMA STILL WEARING HIS GOLF ATTIRE AND BILL DALEY, HILLARY CLINTON, AND ROBERT GATES ON OPPOSITE SIDE OF ROOM. THIS PHOTO APPEARS TO FURTHER SUPPORT THE DESCRIPTION OF THAT DAY’S EVENTS BY INSIDER… 
UPDATE: More details emerge here: " What Valerie Jarrett, and the president, did not know is that Leon Panetta had already initiated a program that reported to him –and only him, involving a covert on the ground attack against the compound." Note: This update comes some 24 hours after our longtime Washington D.C. Insider first outlined shocking details of an Obama administration having been “overruled” by senior military and intelligence officials leading up to the successful attack against terrorist Osama Bin Laden. What follows is further clarification of Insider’s insights surrounding that event. ou stated that President Obama was “overruled” by military/intelligence officials regarding the decision to send in military specialists into the Osama Bin Laden compound. Was that accurate? A: I was told – in these exact terms, “we overruled him.” (Obama) I have since followed up and received further details on exactly what that meant, as well as the specifics of how Leon Panetta worked around the president’s “persistent hesitation to act.” There appears NOT to have been an outright overruling of any specific position by President Obama, simply because there was no specific position from the president to do so. President Obama was, in this case, as in all others, working as an absentee president.
was correct in stating there had been a push to invade the compound for several weeks if not months, primarily led by Leon Panetta, Hillary Clinton, Robert Gates, David Petraeus, and Jim Clapper. The primary opposition to this plan originated from Valerie Jarrett, and it was her opposition that was enough to create uncertainty within President Obama. Obama would meet with various components of the pro-invasion faction, almost always with Jarrett present, and then often fail to indicate his position. This situation continued for some time, though the division between Jarrett/Obama and the rest intensified more recently, most notably from Hillary Clinton. She was livid over the president’s failure to act, and her office began a campaign of anonymous leaks to the media indicating such. As for Jarrett, her concern rested on two primary fronts. One, that the military action could fail and harm the president’s already weakened standing with both the American public and the world. Second, that the attack would be viewed as an act of aggression against Muslims, and further destabilize conditions in the Middle East. Q: What changed the president’s position and enabled the attack against Osama Bin Laden to proceed? A: Nothing changed with the president’s opinion – he continued to avoid having one. Every time military and intelligence officials appeared to make progress in forming a position, Jarrett would intervene and the stalling would begin again. Hillary started the ball really rolling as far as pressuring Obama began, but it was Panetta and Petraeus who ultimately pushed Obama to finally act – sort of. Panetta was receiving significant reports from both his direct CIA sources, as well as Petraeus-originating Intel. Petraeus was threatening to act on his own via a bombing attack. Panetta reported back to the president that a bombing of the compound would result in successful killing of Osama Bin Laden, and little risk to American lives. Initially, as he had done before, the president indicated a willingness to act. But once again, Jarrett intervened, convincing the president that innocent Pakistani lives could be lost in such a bombing attack, and Obama would be left attempting to explain Panetta’s failed policy. Again Obama hesitated – this time openly delaying further meetings to discuss the issue with Panetta. A brief meeting was held at this time with other officials, including Secretary Gates and members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, but Gates, like Panetta, was unable to push the president to act. It was at this time that Gates indicated to certain Pentagon officials that he may resign earlier than originally indicated – he was that frustrated. Both Panetta and Clinton convinced him to stay on and see the operation through. What happened from there is what was described by me as a “masterful manipulation” by Leon Panetta. Panetta indicated to Obama that leaks regarding knowledge of Osama Bin Laden’s location were certain to get out sooner rather than later, and action must be taken by the administration or the public backlash to the president’s inaction would be “…significant to the point of political debilitation.” It was at that time that Obama stated an on-ground campaign would be far more acceptable to him than a bombing raid. This was intended as a stalling tactic, and it had originated from Jarrett. Such a campaign would take both time, and present a far greater risk of failure. The president had been instructed by Jarrett to inform Mr., Panetta that he would have sole discretion to act against the Osama Bin Laden compound. Jarrett believed this would further delay Panetta from acting, as the responsibility for failure would then fall almost entirely on him. What Valerie Jarrett, and the president, did not know is that Leon Panetta had already initiated a program that reported to him –and only him, involving a covert on the ground attack against the compound. Basically, the whole damn operation was already ready to go – including the specific team support Intel necessary to engage the enemy within hours of being given notice. Panetta then made plans to proceed with an on-ground assault. This information reached either Hillary Clinton or Robert Gates first (likely via military contacts directly associated with the impending mission) who then informed the other. Those two then met with Panetta, who informed each of them he had been given the authority by the president to proceed with a mission if the opportunity presented itself. Both Gates and Clinton warned Panetta of the implications of that authority – namely he was possibly being made into a scapegoat. Panetta admitted that possibility, but felt the opportunity to get Bin Laden outweighed that risk. During that meeting, Hillary Clinton was first to pledge her full support for Panetta, indicating she would defend him if necessary. Similar support was then followed by Gates. The following day, and with Panetta’s permission, Clinton met in private with Bill Daley and urged him to get the president’s full and open approval of the Panetta plan. Daley agreed such approval would be of great benefit to the action, and instructed Clinton to delay proceeding until he had secured that approval. Daley contacted Clinton within hours of their meeting indicating Jarrett refused to allow the president to give that approval. Daley then informed Clinton that he too would fully support Panetta in his actions, even if it meant disclosing the president’s indecision to the American public should that action fail to produce a successful conclusion. Clinton took that message back to Panetta and the CIA director initiated the 48 hour engagement order. At this point, the President of the United States was not informed of the engagement order – it did not originate from him, and for several hours after the order had been given and the special ops forces were preparing for action into Pakistan from their position in Afghanistan, Daley successfully kept Obama and Jarrett insulated from that order. This insulation ended at some point with an abort order that I believe originated from Valerie Jarrett’s office, and was then followed up by President Obama. This abort order was later explained as a delay due to weather conditions, but the actual conditions at that time would have been acceptable for the mission. A storm system had been in the area earlier, but was no longer an issue. Check the data yourself to confirm. Jarrett, having been caught off guard, was now scrambling to determine who had initiated the plan. She was furious, repeating the acronym “CoC” and saying it was not being followed. This is where Bill Daley intervened directly. The particulars of that intervention are not clear to me beyond knowing he did meet with Jarrett in his office and following that meeting, Valerie Jarrett was not seen in the West Wing for some time, and apparently no longer offered up any resistance to the Osama Bin Laden mission. What did follow from there was one or more brief meetings between Bill Daley, Hillary Clinton, a representative from Robert Gates’ office, a representative from Leon Panetta’s office, and a representative from Jim Clapper’s office. I have to assume that these meetings were in essence, detailing the move to proceed with the operation against the Osama Bin Laden compound. I have been told by more than one source that Leon Panetta was directing the operation with both his own CIA operatives, as well as direct contacts with military – both entities were reporting to Panetta only at this point, and not the President of the United States. There was not going to be another delay as had happened 24 hour earlier. The operation was at this time effectively unknown to President Barack Obama or Valerie Jarrett and it remained that way until AFTER it had already been initiated. President Obama was literally pulled from a golf outing and escorted back to the White House to be informed of the mission. Upon his arrival there was a briefing held which included Bill Daley, John Brennan, and a high ranking member of the military. When Obama emerged from the briefing, he was described as looking “very confused and uncertain.” The president was then placed in the situation room where several of the players in this event had already been watching the operation unfold. Another interesting tidbit regarding this is that the Vice President was already “up to speed” on the operation. A source indicated they believe Hillary Clinton had personally made certain the Vice President was made aware of that day’s events before the president was. The now famous photo released shows the particulars of that of that room and its occupants. What that photo does not communicate directly is that the military personnel present in that room during the operation unfolding, deferred to either Hillary Clinton or Robert Gates. The president’s role was minimal, including their acknowledging of his presence in the room. At the conclusion of the mission, after it had been repeatedly confirmed a success, President Obama was once again briefed behind closed doors. The only ones who went in that room besides the president were Bill Daley. John Brennan, and a third individual whose identity remains unknown to me. When leaving this briefing, the president came out of it “…much more confident. Much more certain of himself.” He was also carrying papers in his hand that quite possibly was the address to the nation given later that evening on the Bin Laden mission. The president did not have those papers with him prior to that briefing. The president then returned to the war room, where by this time, Leon Panetta had personally arrived and was receiving congratulations from all who were present. In my initial communication to you of these events I described what unfolded as a temporary Coup initiated by high ranking intelligence and military officials. I stand by that term. These figures worked around the uncertainty of President Obama and the repeated resistance of Valerie Jarrett.
|