The United States celebrates the killing of Osama Bin Laden. Hey, did you Americans forget that your government MADE that "terrorist"?
Osama bin Laden deserves his end. He employed terrorism directed at civilians for his "freedom fighting" ideology. I especially thought he needed to be eliminated because of his role in supporting the evil former Taliban government in Afghanistan. It is just that the broadcast of U.S. President Barack Obama and related announcements of his government seems to, if not clearly, tell of no American role in the making of Bin Laden as terrorist.
No doubt bin Laden was a demonic 'freedom fighter' who targeted civilians. But let us not forget that the Al Qaeda's/bin laden's rise to terroristic power was a product of covert CIA intervention in Afghanistan during America's Cold War competition with the Soviet Union.
The U.S. had an important role in promoting Islamic extremism in its bid to gain hegemony against the Soviet Union in the 1980s. Some analysts even believe the security training of Bin Laden came no less than from the CIA. The Bald Eagle nation secretly battled the Soviet Union, which was propping up a pro-Soviet Kabul government, through the then recently Islamized neighbor, Pakistan. The U.S. used Pakistan to course aid to the mujahedeen fighters.
Between 1982 and 1990 the CIA, working with the ISI and Saudi Arabia’s intelligence service, funded the training, arrival, and arming of some 35,000 Islamic militants from 43 Muslim countries in Pakistani madrassas to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan,” said Rashid, who is also author of the non-fiction bestseller Taliban. This “was to sow the seeds of al-Qaeda and turn Pakistan into the world center of jihadism for the next two decades,” he added."
In other words, Bin Laden and his Al Qaeda group were at least partly a product of imperialist or Cold War U.S. policies. How come the U.S. virtually denies its role in the making of that monster by portraying bin Laden as an enemy without mention of their military collaboration in the past? Just hear Mr. Obama's famous broadcast a few days ago--there's absolutely no mention of their 'mistake' in helping create that monster. All we hear is that bin Laden was terrorist bla bla bla. What about the role of the bigger terrorist--all right, the "great nation"--in helping Osama's group become an international terrorist entity of September 11 caliber?
Suspect Timing: Failed NATO assassination in Libya?
Look at the timing, which was right after the very embarrassing news of a failed NATO 'assassinate Kadhafi' (no matter the denial) operation that killed the SON and GRANDCHILDREN instead. Rather conveniently, the Obama administration then came up with this Bin Laden's death news.
"Government spokesman Moussa Ibrahim said: "The attack resulted in the martyrdom of brother Saif al-Arab Muammar Gaddafi, 29 years old, and three of the leader's grandchildren.
"This was a direct operation to assassinate the leader of this country," the spokesman added.".
When did they really carry out the operation against bin Laden (or first learn of his death) in the first place and why flaunt it to the world now? Supposedly, the operation to kill bin Laden took place only the other day or so ago, according to mainstream Western news media. If true, the timing of the operations is nonetheless suspect and apparently designed to bury the news of the blatant assassination/interference in Libya involving Western attacks on civilians.
At any rate, by supporting terrorists or future terrorists like Bin Laden, the U.S. ought to be honest to its citizens and the world by atoning for their hand in having made Bin Laden a terrifying, powerful terrorist as we know or even experienced him to be. As it is now, when the graduates of the CIA terrorist breeding ground get to turn against the U.S. and American citizens, that's when the Bald Eagle government starts to portray its erstwhile international terror agents as, well, "terrorists."
Besides, how anti-terrorist is America really? FYI, in the U.S.' first imperialist war--the Philippine-American war the Bald Eagle nation specifically punished the civilians via the inhumane reconcentration camps in the effort to flush out and emaciate our freedom fighters ("insurectos" in imperialist parlance). These reconcentration camps, at least those in Batangas, were described by one of the U.S. commandants as the "suburbs of Hell." Deaths from disease and hunger in those camps is said to have run high, some say up to 20%.
One reaction to the killing of Obama was by former head waiter of the Windows on the World restaurant in the North Tower of the World Trade Center, Fekkak Mamdouh. He says he is glad about Bin Laden's death supposedly because it was on account of him that "we got into two wars and killed a lot of people in Afghanistan and Iraq".
Golly, are some/many Americans really that ignorant of what their imperialist government does outside their land? George W. Bush blatantly lied to the American public when he claimed that Iraq's Saddam Hussein was supporting Al Qaeda/Bin Laden in order to justify their war of invasion against the Iraq people.
And how many more monsters did the U.S. create when it was to their "interests"? Amidst the history of American superpower domination (or is it imperialist terrorism?) the U.S. policy is to use/ally with whoever serves its interests for the moment--no matter if these convenient allies target innocents or not--as well as their virtual creation of Bin Laden's network of operations, ain't the Bald Eagle at least somewhat terroristic as well?
No Proof, not even one On-Time Photo?
Besides, how come the U.S. government has failed to show not even one, as in ANY photograph of the operation. No picture of a dead bin Laden. Supposedly, in reaction to "conspiracy theories," U.S. officials are debating whether to belatedly release a "“gruesome” photo of the dead bin Laden, conscious that such an image would likely inflame strong passions in some Muslim countries." Really. How silly and lame is that excuse. They can't even show some shots taken from some distance or one with the "gruesome" parts selectively blurred?
And why didn't they bring in those embedded journalists, the practice being the U.S. government's S.O.P. since just about the Gulf War? Some behaved and trusted reporters could have been brought in and made to stay in a safe distance until Operation Geronimo has been successfully concluded so as not to compromise security. To put it simply, the bin Laden operation was so big that having no photo or no coverage is unforgivable. Or most suspicious.
Buried at Sea. Really?
The U.S. story goes like bin Laden's body having been buried at sea. This is probably the best conspiracy-theory-triggering part of the bin Laden operation report. Why so fast as in less than a day and why give a man Obama condemned as a "terrorist who's responsible for the murder of thousands of innocent men, women, and children" a very proper Muslim burial? Alright, the U.S. wants to show to the Islamic world that it respects and religion. So, WHERE ARE THE PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE of bin Laden's supposed burial.
And why at sea? Do Muslims traditionally bury their dead at sea? Actually, according to authors Marc Gellman and Thomas Hartman, Muslim "Burial at sea is permitted only if it's unavoidable." What's so unavoidable about the circumstances of bin Laden's reported death. Won't a simple land burial been good enough? You know, a land burial that would have in the future facilitate some cadaver authenticity check....
Gellman, Marc and Thomas Hartman. Religion for dummies.John Wiley and Sons, 2002