Then their luck changed and on 1st May 2011 the joyous report was made by no less a person than president Obama himself that Osama had been killed in a firefight in Pakistan after navy seals raided his luxurious hideout in that capital.
Now Washington, via White House spokesman Jim Carney is admitting that Bin Ladin was not carrying a weapon when he was killed (so obviously he was not involved in a firefight!). Oh no, he was obviously in no way apologetic in making this admission or even indicating that he understood the natural implications, for according to the New York Times, '..........Mr. Carney said that Bin Laden’s lack of a weapon did not mean he was ready to surrender, and he and other officials reiterated that this was a violent scene, that there was heavy fire from others in the house, and that the commandos did not know whether the occupants were wearing suicide belts or other explosives."
Further, he admitted that the previous report which had claimed that Bin Ladin had used his wife as a :"human shield" was erroneous.Wow. So doesn't Mr. Carney realise that this report puts a totally different spin on the entire affair?
I don't suppose too many persons except maybe his fanatical supporters, are mourning the death of OsamaLadin, Bin a man determined to wipe out as many non Muslims as he could. But how are those who commit murder in the name of Christianity any better than he is? For if he had no weapons and personally posed no threat to those who invaded his compound, it makes his death nothing but cold blooded murder!
It seems to me that those who claim to be walking the high road, merely pay lip service to the concept, for one gets the impression that from day one, there was never ever any intent to bring this alleged terrorist to trial, but to execute him whenever the opportunity presented itself .......and that is exactly what they did and no spin is going to change that raw fact.
No comments:
Post a Comment