President Obama: Everyone was affected by Sept. 11
-
Print
-
Create a hardcopy of this page
-
Font Size:
-
Default font size
-
Larger font size
Posted: Wednesday, May 2, 2012 12:00 am
|
Updated: 6:02 am, Wed May 2, 2012.
President Obama: Everyone was affected by Sept. 11
As we observe the one-year anniversary of the eradication of Osama bin Laden, one of history's more notorious and insidious human beings (term loosely assigned), I'm once again curious as to why the American people have not demanded more proof of his demise other than just a picture of the president and his closest advisors gathered around a monitor looking on in horror.
But then I'm reminded that this president isn't just the leader of freedom-loving nations (another term sadly loosely assigned), he's also our "Daddy in Chief." I suppose we're expected to find immense comfort now because it was again reported that "Counterterrorism adviser John Brennan ... says administration will not release images from raid because there's 'no doubt' terror leader is dead, no need to incite 'emotions.'" (April 29, 2012; www.foxnews.com)
"No doubt?" Says who? In this era of instant news, Photoshop and even questions of the legitimacy of Barack H. Obama's birth certificate, who is he or anyone else to withhold images of that terrible day in 2001 when our nation was brought to its knees by this one monstrous man and his ilk? I wonder if only those directly affected by the felling of the Twin Towers, the attack on the Pentagon as well as the heroic taking over of the fourth aircraft that was thwarted by regular Americans were privy to the actual proof during a private showing of the video.
Mr. Obama should well understand that all Americans were attacked on Sept. 11, 2001 — not just New York City, Washington, D.C. and Pennsylvania. Who doesn't remember the exact moment where they were; what they were doing; and what emotions were stirred when it was displayed on live TV as so many very innocent human beings were murdered?
We're not all children, Mr. Obama. Many of us want to know for sure that at least in this one instance our government isn't trying to pull the wool over our collective eyes (again). Make it our one-year anniversary gift from you. Release the video, Mr. President. We promise we won't go running out the door into oncoming traffic screaming uncontrollably.
Jerome Kinderman
Lodi
Posted in
Letters
on
Wednesday, May 2, 2012 12:00 am.
Updated: 6:02 am.
(%remaining%) Remaining
Thanks for visiting Lodinews.com. You're entitled to view 20 free articles every 30 days. You will see 10 articles for free before being asked to register, and then you can view 10 additional articles by registering or logging in. Then, if you enjoy our site and want full access, we'll ask you to purchase an affordable subscription.
(%remaining%) Remaining
Thanks for visiting Lodinews.com. You're entitled to view 20 free articles every 30 days, and you currently have (%remaining%) free articles remaining ((%remaining_reg%) before being asked to register and (%remaining_sub%) before being asked to subscribe). Then, if you enjoy our site and want full access, we'll ask you to purchase an affordable subscription.
(%remaining%) Remaining
Thanks for visiting Lodinews.com. You're entitled to view 20 free articles every 30 days, and you currently have (%remaining%) free articles remaining ((%remaining_reg%) before being asked to register and (%remaining_sub%) before being asked to subscribe). Then, if you enjoy our site and want full access, we'll ask you to purchase an affordable subscription.
(%remaining%) Remaining
Thanks for visiting Lodinews.com. You're entitled to view 20 free articles every 30 days, and you currently have (%remaining%) total free articles remaining ((%remaining_reg%) before being asked to register and (%remaining_sub%) before being asked to subscribe). Then, if you enjoy our site and want full access, we'll ask you to purchase an affordable subscription.
(%remaining%) Remaining
Thank you for reading Lodinews.com. You have viewed (%viewed%) of your 20 free pages in 30 days. Please login or register at this time and enjoy the next (%remaining%) articles free of charge. After your 20 free articles, we'll ask you to purchase an affordable subscription.
(%remaining%) Remaining
Thank you for reading Lodinews.com. Because you have already viewed this article, you may view it again as many times as you would like without subtracting from your remaining free article views.
(%remaining%) Remaining
Thank you for registering on Lodinews.com. You're entitled to view 20 articles for free every 30 days, and you currently have (%remaining%) remaining. Then, if you enjoy our site and want full access, we'll ask you to purchase an affordable subscription.
(%remaining%) Remaining
Thank you for reading Lodinews.com. You're entitled to view 20 articles for free every 30 days, and you currently have (%remaining%) remaining. Then, if you enjoy our site and want full access, we'll ask you to purchase an affordable subscription.
(%remaining%) Remaining
Thank you for reading Lodinews.com. You're entitled to view 20 articles for free every 30 days, and you currently have (%remaining%) remaining. Then, if you enjoy our site and want full access, we'll ask you to purchase an affordable subscription.
(%remaining%) Remaining
Thank you for reading Lodinews.com. You're entitled to view 20 articles for free every 30 days. This is your last free article this period. On your next article we'll ask you to purchase an affordable subscription.
(%remaining%) Remaining
Thank you for reading 20 free articles on our site. You can come back at the end of your 30-day period for another 20 free articles, or you can purchase a subscription at this time and continue to enjoy valuable local news and information. If you need help, please contact our office at 209-369-2761.
Darrell Baumbach posted at 9:03 am on Wed, May 9, 2012.
Pat stated... Are you wearing a black belt in baiting??? ( in reference to Ms Bobin)
Pat... I think in reality, she is attempting to audition for the Maher show... How unfortunate that someone with so much potential does what she does.
Darrell Baumbach posted at 8:47 am on Wed, May 9, 2012.
thank you for the humor Mr Lucas...
Patrick W Maple posted at 12:09 pm on Tue, May 8, 2012.
msb comments: "Mr. Maple's comments are laughable. Oh, the poor little conservatives are being brutalized horribly!" Are you wearing a black belt in baiting???
Joanne Bobin posted at 7:31 pm on Sun, May 6, 2012.
Mr. Maple's comments are laughable. Oh, the poor little conservatives are being brutalized horribly!
Patrick W Maple posted at 9:52 am on Sun, May 6, 2012.
Andrew: The draw-back is that he has 60 days to notify Congress of the conflict and must then ask for a declaration of war. The simply re-term it in a liberal manner as a police action or the kind. I posted this elsewhere but it sums it up quite well:
"has AMERICA become the land of the special interest and home of the double standard?
lets see: if we lie to the congress, it's a felony and if the congress lies to us its just politics; if we dislike a black person, we're a racist and if a black dislikes whites, it's their 1st amendment right; the government spends millions to rehabilitate criminals and they do almost nothing for the victims; in public schools you can teach that homosexuality is OK, but you better not use the word GOD in the process; you can kill an unborn child, but its wrong to execute a mass murderer; we don't burn books in AMERICA, we now rewrite them; we got rid of the communist and socialist threat by renaming them progressives; we are unable to close our border with mexico, but have no problem protecting the 38th parallel in korea; if you protest against president obama's policies you're a terrorist, but if you burned as AMERICAN flag or george bush in effigy it was your 1st amendment right.
you can have pornography on tv or the internet, but you better not put a nativity scene in a public park during Christmas; we have eliminated all criminals in AMERICA, they are now called sick people; we can use a human fetus for medical research, but it's wrong to use an animal.
we take money from those who work hard for it and give it to those who don't want to work; we all support the Constitution, but only when is supports our political ideology; we still have freedom of speech, but only if we are being politically correct; parenting has been replaced with ritalin and video games; the land of opportunity is now the land of hand outs; the similarity between hurricane katrina and the gulf oil spill is that neither president did anything to help.
and how do we handle a major crisis today? the government appoints a committee to determine who's at fault, then threatens them, passes a law, raises our taxes; tells us the problem is solved so they can get back to their reelection campaign.
what has happened to the land of the free and home of the brave?"
-KEN HUBER
TAWAS CITY, MI
Andrew Liebich posted at 11:13 pm on Sat, May 5, 2012.
Brian Dockter posted at 8:10 am on Fri, May 4, 2012.
"Ms. Bobbin, Do you appreciate the fact Obama has the power to transform this country into something contrary to what our founding fathers envisioned?"
Joanne Bobin's response...posted at 10:54 am on Fri, May 4, 2012.
"As does every president, of course any president must have the support of the Congress and the Supreme Court - unless you are suggesting that Obama is planning a coup and already has his Gaddafi-style uniform waiting for him at the White House tailor's."
Ms. Bobin,
The use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor.
One question: Did Obama have the "support of Congress" when he used our military offensively in Libya?
Andrew Liebich posted at 10:53 pm on Sat, May 5, 2012.
F.Y.I. The Patriot Act was written BEFORE 9/11...
Patrick W Maple posted at 2:12 pm on Sat, May 5, 2012.
BD: I agree...but I would also add that SH killed thousands of Kurds with weapons of mass destruction (gas) not to mention the hundreds of mass graves found later throughout the country. I do believe that we should have made the Iraq govt responsible for the cost we bore to save their people and country, as well as the general clean-up and re-building.
I have a few questions: IF we went flat-out on oil and fuel production in the US which country would be shut off oil imports from? IF we went flat-out on natural gas production who then could we shut oil imports from? IF we produced enough fuel to eliminate oil imports...what would you do with your savings? Hmmmm...could we pay off China?? Could we then pay off some other creditors?? MAYBE we could even afford to pay a little more into the Social Security System?
The problem is that MAYBE is what we are left with...just MAYBE. It's all about leadership...something we do not have today...at nearly every level.
Patrick W Maple posted at 2:01 pm on Sat, May 5, 2012.
BD: "would opt out of it "...nuff said there. WHY would ANYONE get to opt out? Because they said so...who is they? BO and his cronies...the special treatment begins even BEFORE obcare.
John Lucas posted at 1:57 pm on Sat, May 5, 2012.
Brian, I have to commend you for your honesty. You will have to admit you are in a vast minority and if the country knew then what it knows now it would have never happened. I was against the Iraq war from the beginning. I was,however, for going to Afghanistan but we screwed that up too. We should have went in there got that s-b and got right out. It will make you happy that I am against what the President is doing there now. I would bring the troops home tomorrow.
Brian Dockter posted at 11:59 am on Sat, May 5, 2012.
John,
Yes. But, Iraq was really a no win scenerio. On the one hand, the removal of Saddam solved many problems. On the other hand, it brought on many problems.
So, in the grand scheme of things, hindsight is always 20/20. We could also is have a discussion of what led up to WWII and how much of it could have been avoided from a hindsight POV.
John Lucas posted at 10:57 am on Sat, May 5, 2012.
Just one question Brian. Yes or No. Knowing what you know now and could go back in time, would you still have invaded Iraq?
Brian Dockter posted at 10:57 am on Sat, May 5, 2012.
I don't think it's diobolical to provide healthcare coverage for all Americans. But it must done within reason, meaning not breaking the backs of corporations and people from a monetary standpoint. Many corporations are already opting to pay the government the fine so they don't have to provode healthcare for their employees. Now, I know Ms. Bobbin thinks it awful these corporations would do this. But she doesn't think it's awful how much of a financial burden Obamacare is on these corporations that they would opt out of it by paying the fine instead.
Brian Dockter posted at 10:38 am on Sat, May 5, 2012.
Ms. Bobbin,
Regarding your 11:04am post:
You're just a wealth of misinformation and distortion of the truth. The international community was aware for some time Saddam posessed WMDs. He had quite a long time to time to hide them because of al the UN resolutions. It is ignorant to believe he was not a threat to the stability of the Middle East. All efforts to use diplomacy were exhausted. The lead up to the War in Iraq was a long process. The international coalition of troops was in place in the event diplomacy failed.
The Patriot Act was as a result of 911. Except for very isolated incidents of violations of people's constitutional rights, it has been very sucessful. Enhance interrogation led to gaining information that thwarted many future terrorist attacks and led to the capture and killing of Bin Laden along with many other captures and killing of other Al Qaeda operatives. And lastly, the detention of these war criminals
is necessary. The process of trying these war criminals takes time. Happily for you,
some of them have been released. Unfortunatly, many of them went on to rejoining Al Qaeda in Yemen to continue their mission of terrorism.
Darrell Baumbach posted at 3:41 pm on Fri, May 4, 2012.
How humorous.. The man who says all success of the American economy is based 100% on liberal ideas and policies pretends to be interested in facts.
( The world according to Lucas) ... couldanything be further from fact... no way.
Eric Barrow posted at 1:08 pm on Fri, May 4, 2012.
Yes Brian I agree that liberals are trying to transform this country to a place that you will not like or understand. As far as the founding fathers they were at least wise enough to understand that times change and designed a living document that could change with it.
Patrick W Maple posted at 12:23 pm on Fri, May 4, 2012.
mrl stated: "Pat you are an open book. Obama..." Correct...you should have added that your bud BO is NOT...where's the transparency HE promised??? As far as in 6 mos he will no longer have to be.
Patrick W Maple posted at 12:21 pm on Fri, May 4, 2012.
Actually msb: I spelled it that way on purpose: Sync...ophantic...you seem to be in-sync with other posters here. There is NO religious or derogatory connotation in my comment. I suggest you check you own posts for spelling errors.
Joanne Bobin posted at 11:04 am on Fri, May 4, 2012.
Details, Mr. Docktor. Since you are in the know, let us all in on the "agenda."
Hmmmm. - something like faking the existence of weapons of mass destruction in order to start a war? Using a terrorist attack on US soil to impose restrictions that violate the Constitution? Instituting torture in violation of the Geneva Conventions? Detaining suspected terrorists and war criminals in an off-shore prison camp indefinitely without charges?
Just off the top of my head....but the real threat, I suppose, is the diabolical plan to provide heathcare coverage for all Americans.
Truly scary!
Joanne Bobin posted at 10:54 am on Fri, May 4, 2012.
As does every president, of course any president must have the support of the Congress and the Supreme Court - unless you are suggesting that Obama is planning a coup and already has his Gaddafi-style uniform waiting for him at the White House tailor's.
Joanne Bobin posted at 10:51 am on Fri, May 4, 2012.
That's actually "sycophantic," Mr. Maple. And as you are well aware, unless you have been living under a rock, there are commenters in this forum who fairly pant at the propect of Mr. Kinderman applauding their letters or posts or offering his brand of "clarity" and intellect to a topic. You (editorily, that is) can almost feel the slobber emanating from the comments in support of his genius.
John Lucas posted at 10:47 am on Fri, May 4, 2012.
I repeat::
Do you ever really say anything concrete? Do you bring up one policy or anything specific we can build a discussion on? Have you ever heard of having an idea and then providing facts to back it up. Your post is just hot air.
John Lucas posted at 10:46 am on Fri, May 4, 2012.
Do you ever really say anything concrete? Do you bring up one policy or anything specific we can build a discussion on? Have you ever heard of having an idea and then providing facts to back it up. Your post is just hot air.
Joanne Bobin posted at 10:44 am on Fri, May 4, 2012.
Which part do you not recognize?
Andrew Liebich posted at 8:59 am on Fri, May 4, 2012.
It makes little sense for me to illustrate any "facts" as I'm sure you will abstain from doing your own research because on Planet PopTart fact is fiction and TV reality. Why not simply Google "US troops in Libya"? Educate and inform yourself. Instead, you choose to remain ignorant and merely parrot the propaganda spewing from your television. Here are a few of the "facts" you choose to ignore.
In Libya, the "pro-democracy" rebels were led by Al Qaeda paramilitary brigades under the supervision of NATO Special Forces. The "Liberation" of Tripoli was carried out by "former" members of the Libya Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG). In a bitter irony, the Libya Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) was listed until June 2011 by the United Nations Security Council as a bona fide terrorist organization.
From the outset in the early to mid-1990s, the Libya Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) performed the role of an "intelligence asset" on behalf of the CIA and Britain's Secret Intelligence Service, MI6. Starting in 1995, the LIFG was actively involved in waging an Islamic Jihad directed against the secular Libyan regime, including a 1996 attempted assassination of Muamar Qadhafi.
Under the Reagan adminstration, US foreign policy evolved towards the unconditional support and endorsement of the Islamic "freedom fighters". In today's World, the "freedom fighters" are labelled "Islamic terrorists".
Since the Soviet-Afghan war, the Al Qaeda network has served as an "intelligence asset" for the CIA. Confirmed by a 1997 US Senate document, Al Qaeda operatives were used by the Clinton administration to channel support to the Bosnian Muslim Army in the early 1990s.
See (US Senate, Republican Party Committee, Clinton-Approved Iranian Arms Transfers Help Turn Bosnia into Militant Islamic Base, http://rpc.senate.gov/releases/1997/iran.htm, 1998)
Special forces composed of US Navy SEALS, British Special SAS Forces and French legionnaires, disguised in civilian rebel garb, were behind major operations directed against key government buildings including Gadhafi's Bab al-Aziziya compound in central Tripoli.
With that said, are you ever going to address the lack of transparency by the "most transparent government in history"?
Brian Dockter posted at 8:19 am on Fri, May 4, 2012.
Mr. Lucas,
Regarding your 8:21 post. Many people will never get used to Obama's agenda to pull the wool over their eyes whenever he gets the chance. And it's all done for political expediency.
Brian Dockter posted at 8:10 am on Fri, May 4, 2012.
Ms. Bobbin,
Do you appreciate the fact Obama has the power to transform this country into something contrary to what our founding fathers envisioned?
John Lucas posted at 8:21 pm on Thu, May 3, 2012.
Pat you are an open book. Obama like Clinton gets your goat because of the ease of which he beats your side in the political battles. You might as well get used to it for he is going to be President for another 41/2 years.
Darrell Baumbach posted at 7:51 pm on Thu, May 3, 2012.
Of course Ms Bobin... you... the queen of Bigots around every corner in Lodi who substantiates your reality through the Stewart show ... should be trusted to have an accurate picture of reality.
Mr Kinderman obviously, as I do, does not appreciate anyone who has power to transform America into something we do not recognize... Obama has that power. Hate is not in my vocabulary or Mr Kinderman's...
if I were to hate anyone ( which I do not), it would be you... but I do not hate you, just resent what you stand for and spew.
Patrick W Maple posted at 5:13 pm on Thu, May 3, 2012.
Again with the syncophantic comment!?...msb is your hair on fire or something??
The easy distinction for BO is that it is WHAT he does and doesn't do NOT who or whom he is or isn't. Who he is is arrogant and condescending, loose playing with the Constitution and and empty suit who surrounds himself with more empty suits (reminds me of a Joseph A Bank commercial) and speaks only to the crowd who will not challenge him. Where is the transparency we were promised? Maybe he could look in Al Gore's "lock box". He's fooling no one - except his most devoted followers."
Joanne Bobin posted at 10:14 am on Thu, May 3, 2012.
Obviously, Mr. Baumbach, your sycophantic obsession with Mr. Kinderman has clouded your judgment.
There are many in this forum who are distinctly aware of Mr. Kinderman's hatred for President Obama and it is quite obvious that Mr. Kinderman struggles mightily to obscure that fact with his attempts at creative writing.
He's fooling no one - except his most devoted followers.
Joanne Bobin posted at 10:13 am on Thu, May 3, 2012.
Since you obviously only see that "facts" that you care to see, Mr. Liebich, it really makes little sense to illustrate, but I'll try to keep it simple for you:
Gaddafi was captured and executed by his own people. No US troops involved.
Saddam Hussein was hated by most Iraqi's with the exception of the insurgents who were already battling US troops.
What planet do you really live on? Oh, that's right - the planet where conspiracy theories are fact and facts are conspiracy theories.
Joanne Bobin posted at 10:13 am on Thu, May 3, 2012.
Since you obviously only see that "facts" that you care to see, Mr. Liebich, it really makes little sense to illustrate, but I'll try to keep it simple for you:
Gaddafi was captured and executed by his own people. No US troops involved.
Saddam Hussein was hated by most Iraqi's with the exception of the insurgents who were already battling US troops.
What planet do you really live on? Oh, that's right - the planet where conspiracy theories are fact and facts are conspiracy theories.
Joanne Bobin posted at 10:07 am on Thu, May 3, 2012.
Obviously, Mr. Baumbach, your sycophantic obsession with Mr. Kinderman has clouded your judgment.
There are many in this forum who are distinctly aware of Mr. Kinderman's hatred for President Obama and it is quite obvious that Mr. Kinderman struggles mightily to obscure that fact with his attempts at creative writing.
He's fooling no one - except his most devoted followers.
Darrell Baumbach posted at 2:29 am on Thu, May 3, 2012.
Mr Lucas stated...If you were not going to respond to anything I said why did you bother to write 276 words
Answer...Maybe the best response is no resonse when it comes to Mr Lucas.
Darrell Baumbach posted at 2:24 am on Thu, May 3, 2012.
Hatred? what hatred? Ms Bobin is confused. I think Mr Kinderman was simply making observations and commenting on them. Ms Bobin on the other hand is simply attempting to attack and distort rather than adding something constructive.
As usual, Mr Kinderman is precise and accurate in his assessment.
Andrew Liebich posted at 12:44 am on Thu, May 3, 2012.
Mr. Kinderman has merely suggested that "the most transparent government in history" be transparent. Apparently this is a difficult concept for some to grasp.
There are a myriad of inconsistencies surrounding the alleged raid on the Bin Laden compound, and the Obama administration’s constant flip-flopping of the official narrative has only increased suspicion surrounding the political motivations behind the whole episode.
Honestly, the entrenched ignorance displayed concerning this topic is utterly pathetic.
For example, "The danger and persecution that our troops overseas would potentially encounter if this evidence was ever produced would be unfathomable." Seriously? What military conflict and/or strike doesn't cause victims to resent the attackers? What about the video footage and pictures of Gaddafi and Hussein? I suppose they were immune from the "danger and persecution that our troops overseas would potentially encounter"
The simple truth remains, to date, the U.S. government has offered zero evidence, I'll repeat that for the willfully ignorant and mentally oblivious, ZERO EVIDENCE that A) Osama Bin Laden was killed on the night of May 1st, 2011, and B) Osama Bin Laden was responsible for the September 11 events.
The fairytale your TV told you is not evidence and if you believe we currently have "the most transparent government in history" you are from Planet PopTart.
Joanne Bobin posted at 10:19 pm on Wed, May 2, 2012.
For all of his claims of being a Christian man, Mr. Kinderman fails that standard in that his hatred for one man would put thousands of US troops in danger.
Shame, shame on you, Jerome Kinderman.
John Lucas posted at 10:04 pm on Wed, May 2, 2012.
Jerome, Your reply to my post at 7:07 pm on Wed, May 2, 2012 was 276 words.
My post made the point nobody makes about Iraq that they kicked out the inspectors and invaded anyway. You said not a word about that or why Bush went into Iraq if not for WMD's
Then I asked if you knew what you knew now would you have invaded Iraq anyway. I correctly said you would not give me a straight answer. It is a one word answer. Yes or No. Certainly you know the answer to that question and could have shared it with us
If you were not going to respond to anything I said why did you bother to write 276 words?
Jerome Kinderman posted at 9:10 pm on Wed, May 2, 2012.
While I said you could “feel free to try and argue that again,” please understand that I have no desire to do so. After attempting to discuss it rationally for years, there have been far too many others on this forum and elsewhere who would have nothing of that. I stated my case many times over even to the point that I would wait until Colin Powell might be in a position to settle many of the difficult questions after he was no longer a member of the Bush Cabinet or his administration. To date, Mr. Powell has said very little. In short his silence is deafening.
As for your final question where you qualify it with the criticism that I wouldn’t be forthcoming, please know that as a man of 55 there are a number of things that I would do differently had I better information at the time. That’s not only an unfair question, it isn’t too smart. I try hard not to dwell on such things as they really don’t accomplish much other than reveal a bunch of coulda, shoulda, woulda’s. I don’t waste much time on such hypotheticals.
I will state that I’m not at all surprised that Bush’s name would find its way into a debate about Obama. In fact, at the time of this posting Bush’s name shows up no less than eleven times; not once in my letter and only once in a response of mine that you have just referenced. Aren’t we long past the point where Bush needs to shoulder the blame for things lacking in the current president? I think so. Let’s try to move along.
John Lucas posted at 7:07 pm on Wed, May 2, 2012.
you said:
As for Bush and Iraq - been there and done that (over and over), sir. The majority of Congress along with Colin Powell, Bill Clinton and even his esteemed wife believed Hussein was in possession of WMDs. But feel free to try and argue that again.
I will tell you where your argument breaks down. They had the inspectors on the ground in Iraq. The threat of invasion brought them back. Rumsfeld and Powell both said they knew where the WMD's were. The Inspectors asked for that information and got nothing. Then Bush kicked out the inspectors and invaded anyway. At that point the Bush administration lost what little credibility they had. Let me repeat. They kicked out the inspectors and invaded anyway. Whatever the real reason these idiots went to Iraq is still a mystery but the idea they went there because of WMD's is a flat out lie. If you think they invaded Iraq because of WMD's please enlighten the rest of use with your reasoning.
By the way there were millions of us who were against the Iraq insanity from the beginning. I have one more question for you which I doubt you will give a straight answer to. If you knew what you know now would you invade Iraq again?
Thomas Heuer posted at 5:45 pm on Wed, May 2, 2012.
Well DB has solved JKs problem. All he needs to do is have the ACLU get his "snuff" photos for him. But as JB Said "The danger and persecution that our troops overseas would potentially encounter if this evidence was ever produced would be unfathomable. If you can handle having that blood on your hands..." So when you get your photos keep them to yourself.
PS DB remember there is a difference between nameless pictures and OBL images.
Jerome Kinderman posted at 5:43 pm on Wed, May 2, 2012.
Of course those are my words, Mr. Heuer; and I stand by them. Where you misunderstand me is where you go off the reservation. My lack of trust in President Obama has little to do with this matter; it's more to do with nearly everything else he's done up to this point in time.
As far as the leaking of classified information, there're very few people who would attempt such a feat knowing full well that the penalty for it could easily result in death during time of war. Self preservation is a big motivator in keeping one's mouth shut. But more than that, aside from the fact that many of our military men and women are no gentlemen or ladies, very few are traitors.
As for Bush and Iraq - been there and done that (over and over), sir. The majority of Congress along with Colin Powell, Bill Clinton and even his esteemed wife believed Hussein was in possession of WMDs. But feel free to try and argue that again.
Darrell Baumbach posted at 5:24 pm on Wed, May 2, 2012.
Yes... we must be very concerned about inflaming our enemies and Barack H Obama has a history of such concern ( gag)
The left was very angry with Obama that he did not release more information. The liberal left was not concerned "AT ALL" about the potential harm to soldiers...as long as they could get Bush, all was fair game.
Obama came into office promising disclosure and accountability as an antidote to a Bush era marred by Abu Ghraib, waterboarding, secret prisons and warrantless wiretapping. Litigation by the American Civil Liberties Union to compel the government to release chilling photographs of abused and violated detainees at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison
Obama administration to release Bush-era detainee photos
The pictures show Americans' alleged abuse of prisoners in Iraq and Afghanistan. An ACLU lawyer says they prove that Abu Ghraib 'was not aberrational.'
April 24, 2009|Peter Wallsten, Julian E. Barnes and Greg Miller
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration agreed late Thursday to release dozens of photographs depicting alleged abuses at U.S. prisons in Iraq and Afghanistan during the Bush White House.
The decision will make public for the first time photos obtained in military investigations at facilities other than the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. Forty-four photos that the American Civil Liberties Union was seeking in a court case, plus a "substantial number" of other images, will be released by May 28.
Thomas Heuer posted at 5:15 pm on Wed, May 2, 2012.
JK your words "It’s more about my growing distrust of this administration. Keep in mind that as Commander-in-Chief, Barack H. Obama has the power to silence anyone in the United States Armed Forces he pleases; including the much lauded Navy SEALS."
Of course where would Wiki Leaks be without military members providing the secret data they were ordered to keep secret.
And you add " Mr. Obama is not trustworthy." Why? Because he didn't provide you with some "snuff" photos? You must be as incensed as I am over the lies G Bush told us to get us into war with Iraq. Now thats reason to be bumed out.
Joanne Bobin posted at 3:56 pm on Wed, May 2, 2012.
Mr. Kinderman has reached a new low in his hatred for Obama with this bit of twaddle.
Jerome - as an ex-military "man" you should be ashamed for demanding that proof of bin Laden's demise be produced. Toward what end?
The danger and persecution that our troops overseas would potentially encounter if this evidence was ever produced would be unfathomable.
If you can handle having that blood on your hands, then continue advocating for the publication of evidence that would be acceptable to you.
"Content of his character?" He has shown it by writing this letter, Mr. Kindseth.
Patrick W Maple posted at 3:45 pm on Wed, May 2, 2012.
JK: Trust but verify vs verify then trust. I prefer the latter.
We have had that conversation before...if the feet move, then maybe I believe the lips. Personally, I like your opinion and can see the logic in your comments. I do find it interesting too that not one GI or sailor took a picture (with a camera phone) (that would be worth millions of dollars) (as was Hussein's hanging) at some point in the process. With all of the current conspiracy theories (from Ming Tao, to AH, to RFK, to MLK, JFK, the Twin Towers) that this administration would release enough information to prevent this one.
I am positive that no one from Lodi or the surrounding area was there when the creep was killed, captured and then later killed, or is rotting in a torture chamber somewhere...I can therefore state that no matter what is stated here or anywhere...it is mere speculation. Easily quashed.
Eric Barrow posted at 2:44 pm on Wed, May 2, 2012.
Jerome your bias shows in your choice of words what the President said was “A path to peace is now set before them. Those who refuse to walk it will face strong Afghan Security Forces, backed by the United States and our allies.” This is hardly pleading. Also the loss of innocent lives after the Presidents speech is exactly why it would not be prudent to show the killing or remains of Osama, only to satisfy the conspiracy theorist. I agree with Steve that video or photos would not satisfy some just as seeing Obama’s birth certificate did not satisfy many of the birthers. Thomas also has a great point if it makes people happy they can pretend Osama is alive and that they don’t care just like during the Bush era.
Jerome Kinderman posted at 1:54 pm on Wed, May 2, 2012.
If it’s true that this administration’s concern for our enemies is more important than releasing proof of the death of one of the most notorious criminals of all time, then shame on them. Worrying about what they might do if their sensitivities are incited is nothing less than providing aid and comfort to them. And since during a time of war (which we are still waging) the penalty for such aid and comfort is death, this makes such a notion all that more hard to swallow.
So which is it - a nanny state too concerned about how hard it might be for us to take viewing such videos or the fear our government exhibits because of how our enemies might react? Either one is unpalatable to me.
We need leaders to have a real desire to destroy our enemies - not mollycoddle them into submission. As we witnessed just yesterday, after President Obama pleaded with those who wish to destroy us to lay down their arms and join us in peaceful endeavors, just how did they react? Did they follow his lead; is our mission in Afghanistan now an unqualified success? No, they understood full well that inaction like that of our president only emboldens them to kill at will – which is precisely what they did. They spat in the eye of the President of the United States.
My urging the government to release the evidence that bin Laden is dead will go further to defeat these monsters and prove to Americans that we can trust our government than any words could ever do.
John Kindseth posted at 1:38 pm on Wed, May 2, 2012.
I am always saddened by the few and predictable bloggers here who attack a writer because of who they are rather than the content of their character.
Most comments are devoid of facts.
John Lucas posted at 12:33 pm on Wed, May 2, 2012.
Yes there are many loonies in this world. What is amazing is how many of them show up here
John Lucas posted at 12:28 pm on Wed, May 2, 2012.
ah, the Conservative Republican version of Mark Twain has blessed with his wit. To describe his intelligence one would have to put the letters nit in front of the last word in my first sentence.
John Lucas posted at 12:16 pm on Wed, May 2, 2012.
You and Mr Heller bring up a good point that did not occur to me. A brewing attempt at a conspiracy theory. I guess we are in for the birther and swift boat nonsense again. I always like how they explain how Presidents birth announcements got into the newspapers or how John Kerry was a coward by pulling someone out of the river under fire and by turning his boat into the fire he was receiving on a riverbank and personally killing a VC who was firing on them with a b40 rocket. I suppose now Jerome and Andrew will tell us that the reason we have not heard from Osama is that he wants the President to be reelected. It would be interesting to visit the planet that people like Andrew and Jerome live on.
Thomas Heuer posted at 10:27 am on Wed, May 2, 2012.
Thank you Sam Heller for a reasonable perspective in this brewing attempt at a conspiracy theory. The concern for release of photos/videos is not for our sensitivities being the main concern its the Bin Laudin sypathizers who might be incited to attack us is the main concern.
This sudden concern is so hypocritical since we were lulled by Bush 43 into thinking we didn't know where OBLwas and didn't much care any way. So if you weren't concerned then whats all the concern now? If you for some reason you don't believe OBL is dead just go back to your previous instructions and assume we can't find him and we don't care.
Jerome Kinderman posted at 9:45 am on Wed, May 2, 2012.
It’s been 66 years since Adolph Hitler allegedly committed suicide in his infamous bunker and was then quickly taken to the streets of Berlin to be set on fire along with his bride of only a few hours. Yet there are those who still believe that he was actually spirited out of Germany in those waning days and hours of the Third Reich to some sympathetic nation in South America. No verifiable evidence whatsoever that he had actually died; just six decades of doubt. Is this what we really want for America’s Most Wanted of the 21st Century?
Is bin Laden dead? I believe he is. But just like so many other events and claims made by our government over the years, I’d like to know for sure that he died in the precise manner that they wish (or need) for us to believe. Buried at sea? Why?
Some are content to “believe” the Navy SEALS because they are “honorable and trustworthy.” That’s very nice, but not necessarily true either. I’ve heard so many Americans set forth their belief that our men and women in uniform are the epitome of ladies and gentlemen whilst paraded about in their finest Class A uniforms. As a former member of the United States Armed Forces, I can state without a doubt that this Norman Rockwell portrait of them is often misconstrued. Let’s not forget Abu Ghraib and even now the concerns that at least some military members might be involved in the latest brewing scandal from South America along with the Secret Service - they too heretofore believed to be the best of the best and even more trustworthy and honorable than the U.S. Military.
Nevertheless, my concern isn’t really about whether or not bin Laden is dead; I’m certain he is. It’s more about my growing distrust of this administration. Keep in mind that as Commander-in-Chief, Barack H. Obama has the power to silence anyone in the United States Armed Forces he pleases; including the much lauded Navy SEALS.
From this point forward I’ve somewhat adopted Ronald Reagan’s stance on trust where he spoke of our relations with the former Soviet Union: “Trust, but verify.” Mr. Obama is not trustworthy. It bothers me immensely to have to think this as one would always want to believe the President of the United States worthy of our faith that he would not lie - especially in light of so many others whose lies have nearly brought our nation to its knees (e.g., Nixon; Clinton).
This administration claims the release of the video proof of bin Laden’s capture and death would “incite emotions.” Well, I would hope so! But I would also like to believe that for a nation forever changed by the orders given by this one terrible man, verified proof of his demise would serve as “closure” for all of us, especially for those directly affected by the events of September 11, 2001.
I’m 55-years-old - I don’t need anyone to act on my behalf because they feel I might not be able to handle such photographic proof. Indeed, as a nation we didn’t become so emotionally paralyzed over the viewing of the beheading of Nicholas Berg even though he was completely innocent! Why weren’t those images quickly kept from our oh-so-innocent eyes? And here we have such concerns over our reaction to viewing the death of someone not unlike the Twentieth Century’s bad boy Hitler? C’mon! This makes no sense whatsoever.
Robert Chapman posted at 9:01 am on Wed, May 2, 2012.
Jerome, don't be such a skeptic. Obama has Osama's pictures locked up in a box under his bed along with his REAL certificate of live certificate.
Andrew Liebich posted at 8:16 am on Wed, May 2, 2012.
On August 6, 2011, three months after the supposed killing of bin Laden, 22 members of the exact same Navy SEALS Team 6 who had conducted the Abbotabad raid all died in a helicopter crash in Afghanistan.
Andrew Liebich posted at 8:16 am on Wed, May 2, 2012.
The Associated Press has asked for files about the Osama bin Laden raid in more than 20 separate [FOIA] requests. In response to a Freedom of Information Act requests made by the Associated Press, the Pentagon says it has no records... not one photo, not one video, not even an e-mail of bin Laden’s death.
The Pentagon told the AP it could not locate any photographs or video taken during the raid or showing bin Laden’s body. The Pentagon also said it could not find any images of bin Laden’s body on the Navy aircraft carrier nor could they find any death certificate, autopsy report or results of DNA identification tests for bin Laden, or any pre-raid materials discussing how the government planned to dispose of bin Laden’s body if he were killed.
Obama, Clinton and their staff saw virtually nothing whatsoever of the mission that allegedly led to the assassination of Bin Laden, because according to CIA director Leon Panetta, there was a 25 minute blackout of the live feed which was cut off before the US Navy SEALS even entered the building.
People in renal failure having dialysis done in fricking caves do NOT live for ten more years. Period. There was no dialysis equipment found in the compound the SEALS raided on May 2. Of course there wasn’t. Bin Laden wasn’t in that compound because Bin Laden has been dead for years.
Sam Heller posted at 7:09 am on Wed, May 2, 2012.
Mr Kinderman, you may not be aware that with Photoshop CS6 it is as easy to alter a video as it is a photo.
Personally I do not need a photo, a video or even a dead body to prove that Osama Bin Laden is dead. I believe our Navy SEALS are honorable and trustworthy. Their word that they got him is good enough for me.