Usama inconsistencies

By William R. Toler

The more we learn about the alleged incident with Usama bin Laden, the less we know.

The official story coming from the White House and the mainstream media has more holes then bin Laden…if that was him and if he’s really dead.

First, we were told that there was a violent firefight between bin Laden and the special operations team that was sent in to get him. Once the team was inside the compound and confronted the “world’s most wanted terrorist”, he used his wife as a human shield and was shot in the head.

But the story has changed as many times, if not more, than I’ve changed underwear since Sunday night.

Instead of a firefight, we were told bin Laden was taken out unarmed. Then Thursday, FOX News reported that he ran into a room with two guns. As for the human shield, it was later said that she attacked the SEAL team and was shot in defense, but not killed. FOX also reported Thursday that bin Laden pushed her toward the advancing assault team.

We were told the gaping head wound was caused by a shot to the head, above his left eye. Then it was reported that he had 2 holes in his head, one above each eye. Theeennnn, ABC News reported that he was shot once in the head and once in the chest.

As for the group that carried out the raid, it was first reported that it was a special operations team. Later it was the CIA and Navy SEALs. It was then announced that it was the elite SEAL Team Six that performed the mission. Wednesday night, the Associated Press Radio News reported that the Navy wouldn’t confirm it was that team, but judging from an email it is highly likely.

Got all that?

Following the raid, his body was taken to Afghanistan, then flown to a naval ship where he was given a burial at sea in what some call a twisted interpretation of Islamic tradition. Others see it as just fishy. Why dispose of the body? Because the government was allegedly trying to honor him in death. Many Americans feel it was a cover up.

As for proof, the Obama Administration said that it was considering releasing photos of the corpse. The media stood waiting…and waiting…and waiting…as the debate continued. Tuesday night, CIA Director Leon Panetta said the photos would be made public. The next day, the administration had reversed and said it would not release the photos. The reason: a fear of anti-US sentiment and the possibilty of retribution.

Really? The “terrorists” already “want to attack us.” We killed their leader. Showing pictures of his dead body is what’s gonna piss them off?

The photos, deemed too gory by some members of Congress, are being called for by republicans and the media. An editorial in the Shelby Star says the reason for the refusal “evokes a doctrine known as the heckler’s veto…a concept used to curtail a speaker’s expression in order to head off a volatile response by a hostile audience.” The paper expalins that regarding the form of censorhsip, courts have found “that American citizens operating under First Amendment protections are responsible for their own speech and conduct, not the reactions — and overreactions — of other individuals.”

The Star op-ed went on to assert that if the government bases its policy on “the threats and taunts of terror groups…the implications for this nation’s future are frightening.”

But would the photos really prove anything? As with the JFK Zapruder film, it only raised more questions and “conspiracy theories.” The photos could be forged. There was a forged photo circulating the internet following the raid that was used to lure unsuspecting Facebookers into a virus scam.

The credibility is already lost. For some, there will never be any “proof-positive” evidence to convince them that bin Laden was really killed during the Mayday mayhem.