(click on all underlined links to see direct source of information from mainstream media)

1. Why would they kill him so fast?

He was old, in poor health, walked with a cane and was not armed. The likely hood of him escaping the Navy Seals, who have the entire building surrounded and are fully armed while he is not, is very low. Our government says torture really works, so why didn’t we keep him alive and torture him and learn everything he knows? Especially if he knows where the alleged secret nukes are that may be scattered throughout the USA???

2. Why did the story from the White House change so much so fast after the initial announcement by President Obama?

At first, our president said on live national TV, that there was a firefight. Then, the White House later stated there was no firefight and only one person was armed but he was in a different part of the palace. Then they said he used his wife as a human shield and later came back and said that never happened either. Why does the storyline change so much if the White House watched it on the live feed from the “situation room”?

The head of the CIA actually came out later and said there was a 20-25 minute blackout in the live feed right before “they went in”. So according to the head of the CIA, the White House didn’t even see what happened even though they originally claimed they did and even put out pictures from the “situation room” implying they were watching the action live (see the picture at the top of this page).

President Obama said in his speech, that the CIA was ordered to “kill or capture” Bin Laden. However, it later came out that the whole time, the mission was to kill Bin Laden, not capture him alive.

So just to make sure we can clearly see all of the lies story changes, here they are:

1. Bin Laden didn’t have a gun nor did anyone else in the same room as him (a HUGE contradiction to what Obama told us about a )
2. Bin Laden didn’t use wife as a human shield
3. The Navy Seals were ordered to kill him, not capture him
4. The White House did NOT see the action live

3. Why would they have dumped the body so fast?

Six hours after Obama announced the death of Bin Laden, they dumped the body into the Arabian sea while most Americans were sleeping. Obama’s speech never mentioned this small detail.

With Saddam Hussein, we got to see him in jail, we saw the trial, then we later saw the leaked hanging video. We get none of that with Bin Laden. The government said they buried Bin Laden’s body “in accordance with Islamic practice and tradition”. U.S. officials maintained that the burial was necessary because arrangements could not be made with any country to bury bin Laden within 24 hours, as dictated by Muslim practice.

However, the Muslim practice has not always been followed by the U.S. in the past. For example, the bodies of Uday Hussein and Qusay Hussein, sons of Saddam Hussein, were held for 11 days before being released for burial.

Another problem is According to actual Muslims, being buried at sea isn’t what the Muslim religion calls for. And even if it was, why would the U.S. care that he gets a proper burial and ceremony (when the 9/11 victims sure didn’t get that)?

Was it really to show respect to the Muslim world, or was it to provide an excuse to never have to prove to anyone that the whole thing went down like they say?

Another common excuse for the quick body dump at sea goes like this…

“The corpse was then dropped into the Arabian Sea from the aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson, to avoid having a burial place which could become a terrorist shrine.”

You’re trying to tell me that the military can’t “hide a body” from fanatics? How hard is it to hide a body on an aircraft carrier or within some secret military base somewhere. I could hide the body in my closet and no fundamentalists would ever find him! (although I may need a very strong air filter after a while!)

Professor Peter Romaniuk of John Jay College described the burial at sea as a way to forestall further questions. He stated: “Obviously they’re going to be under pressure to show a body or produce further evidence, but this was a way of taking that issue off the table.”

4. WHY WON’T THEY RELEASE THE PICTURES, VIDEOS OR DNA EVIDENCE?
They say it’s because the picures are too gruesome and would cause animosity in the Muslim world. Okay then, they were recording the action the whole time from their helmet cams right as was stated earlier. Even though there was a black out in the live feed, the recording was still rolling.

Why not release video/pics from the raid right before his death? Show us up until the point of his death. Cut the tape right when we’re about to kill him. He’d still be alive, nothing gruesome. We could see him and see that he’s unarmed. Why won’t they release those files?

The only proof of Bin Laden being dead that we were offered was Obama telling us that there was a DNA match between the man killed by the Navy SEALs and OBL. Even if it is possible to get DNA done so quickly, and the military did have bin Laden DNA lying around in a lab somewhere – where is the empirical proof???

Patriots ask questions and demand answers!

httpv://youtu.be/1OW4A-yd9BI

 

 

Top US government insider Dr. Steve R. Pieczenik, a man who held numerous different influential positions under three different Presidents and still works with the Defense Department, shockingly told The Alex Jones Show yesterday that Osama Bin Laden died in 2001 and that he was prepared to testify in front of a grand jury how a top general told him directly that 9/11 was a false flag inside job.

Pieczenik cannot be dismissed as a “conspiracy theorist”. He served as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State under three different administrations, Nixon, Ford and Carter, while also working under Reagan and Bush senior, and still works as a consultant for the Department of Defense. A former US Navy Captain, Pieczenik achieved two prestigious Harry C. Solomon Awards at the Harvard Medical School as he simultaneously completed a PhD at MIT.

Recruited by Lawrence Eagleburger as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Management, Pieczenik went on to develop, “the basic tenets for psychological warfare, counter terrorism, strategy and tactics for transcultural negotiations for the US State Department, military and intelligence communities and other agencies of the US Government,” while also developing foundational strategies for hostage rescue that were later employed around the world.

Pieczenik also served as a senior policy planner under Secretaries Henry Kissinger, Cyrus Vance, George Schultz and James Baker and worked on George W. Bush’s election campaign against Al Gore. His record underscores the fact that he is one of the most deeply connected men in intelligence circles over the past three decades plus.

Read full story here

http://youtu.be/7ksatFd8gkY

Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan weighs in on the Bin Laden myth with Dr. Drew.

http://youtu.be/Dn1EXwjFOa0

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.

Read the entire story here