Media Scrambles as bin Laden Story Crumbles
by Alex Newman
The
New American
While the establishment
media was busy parroting
President Obama's announcement
of Osama bin Laden's supposed assassination, reporting
the unsubstantiated claims as if they were unquestionable facts,
much of the so-called "alternative" press was
far more cautious
and accurate, it turns out. But more importantly, with the
new official storyline indicating
that bin Laden was in fact unarmed, bigger and much more important
questions are beginning to emerge.
In terms of
coverage, it turns out that the skeptical approach proved far superior
in terms of getting it right. Countless mainstream sources were
so confident in Obama's word that they reported
many of the claims as fact
without even attributing them to the President.
But the official
White House narrative has been changed
so many times in recent days that now it's almost unrecognizable.
There wasn't even a fire fight; yet this was one of the crucial
elements of the original story that justified the assassination
of a person the government painted as the most valuable source of
information on the planet the leader of al-Qaeda. And in
reporting
the statements as fact, the establishment press has officially been
left with egg all over its face again.
"[Bin
Laden] was engaged in a firefight with those that entered the area
of the house he was in," said
terror czar John Brennan. Similarly, Obama said
that "after a firefight, they killed Osama bin Laden and took
custody of his body." The next day, however, the White House
spokesman admitted
bin Laden "was not armed." Trying to save face and justify
the killing of an unarmed man, the spokesman added, without elaborating,
that "resistance does not require a firearm."
More than a
few other important parts of the storyline have been altered, contradicted,
or simply exposed as false, too. Everything from which of bin
Laden's sons was supposedly killed to the claim that his wife was
killed after being used as a "human shield" all
of it has changed
for some reason or another. The transcript after Brennan's speech
was altered
to change the name of the dead son. The new and improved narrative
now says
that not only was bin Laden's wife not killed, but that she was
not used as a human shield.
Originally
the White House also suggested top officials watched the raid live
through a video feed. Terror czar Brennan, for example, claimed
that they "had real-time visibility into the progress of the
operation." CIA boss Leon Panetta later exposed
that claim as false in an interview with PBS, saying: "There
was a time period of almost 20 or 25 minutes that we really didn't
know just exactly what was going on."
That means
the "photo
op" of Obama and other officials intently "watching"
the operation in the "Situation Room" was almost certainly
staged for the press. And almost every media outlet that ran the
picture used inaccurate captions parroting the White House claims.
And there's
more. The night of the raid, one administration official told
reporters that a helicopter was lost due to mechanical failure.
During that same briefing, another administration official said,
"We didn't say it was mechanical." Now they claim
the crash had something to do with the temperature at bin Laden's
supposed compound.
A poorly photo-shopped
image of a dead bin Laden embarrassed a large swath of the world
press and several
Senators, too. Shortly after newspapers and television stations
around the globe ran the image, it was exposed as a shoddy forgery
that had been circulating for years. Now Obama said he "decided"
not
to release any pictures or any other evidence that
any element of the story is true, for that matter.
And then there's
the burial issue. The Obama administration originally claimed
no country would accept the body; so, it was dumped at sea
Mafia style in accordance with what Obama alleged were Islamic
traditions and customs. When prominent Muslim theological leaders
repudiated
that lie and noted that it was actually a violation of Islamic tenets
to bury Osama bin Laden in the ocean, the new line was that the
decision was to avoid the creation of a "shrine." That
lie fell apart, too, when it was widely reported that bin Laden's
brand of Islam calls for unmarked graves building any sort
of shrine would
have been blasphemous. So far, no new excuses have been concocted
for allegedly feeding the body to the fish.
After the numerous
discrepancies and falsehoods in the storyline became painfully obvious,
the Associated
Press, USA
Today, Fox News and other outlets slowly and begrudgingly
started to report it. "From the first moments, a good number
of the details about bin Laden's killing, on points large and
small, have been wrong," admitted
a Fox reporter in one of the more candid acknowledgements to appear
in the mainstream press.
Read
the rest of the article
May
9, 2011
Copyright
© 2011 The New American
|