Revealed: The President Lied About Burying Bin Laden At Sea. BBC: ZZZZzzzzzzz

So the hacking of Stratfor’s emails by Anonymous and published by WikiHacks has revealed that, contrary to what we were told, Osama Bin Laden’s body was not buried at sea but was in fact flown to a military facility in the US for examination. I remember well when the BBC reported what they were told by the US, and nobody questioned it. Of course, we were told, they needed to get rid of the body as soon as possible lest it become a target for fanatics, and to deny his followers a shrine. As of his writing, silence from the BBC. I’m not ready to label this one “BBC Censorship” just yet, as I understand it takes time for BBC producers to figure out how to react to reality in cases like this.

When they discussed Mohammedan burial practices after Ghaddafi’s death, the BBC took great care to remind us that the US bent over backwards to follow the religion’s customs with Bin Laden’s body. We were reminded that his body was washed and wrapped in white linen before being tossed to the fishes. Mark Mardell wrote a blog post explaining how wise the President was for not making a big speech about the targeted assassination and instead flying up to Ground Zero for a highly publicized laying of a wreath. Laura Trevelyan’s analysis made it appear triumphant:

Caricatured as a foreign policy wimp in the 2008 election campaign, Barack Obama is now a warrior president. Americans who gathered here feel their sense of national pride, which was so damaged by Bin Laden, has now been greatly restored. It took almost 10 years, but America kept her word.

No sneering or rolling of the eyes when The Obamessiah has somebody killed and is feted with chants of “USA! USA!” No quotes from angry Muslims complaining about the illegality or threatening revenge.

The BBC even fretted over some salvage diver who wanted to find the body. Of course, he was really questioning whether Bin Laden was actually dead, and wanted to find the body as proof. Heaven forbid anyone assume the President might not be telling the truth, eh?

So now we know that the President lied to the world about what happened. Will the BBC follow up on this? Will they even care? According to their own explanation of Islamic burial rights, this is a violation, an offense to all Muslims everywhere.

And if any defenders of the indefensible complain that Russia Today isn’t a reliable source, how about NBC or the Telegraph or the Toronto Star?

I’ll be updating this post as the BBC gets around to dealing with this. If they dare. All I’ve seen so far is a link appearing in the “Elsewhere on the Web” section. And that was a link to a Pakistani paper. So somebody at BBC News Online knows about this.

Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to Revealed: The President Lied About Burying Bin Laden At Sea. BBC: ZZZZzzzzzzz

  1. Span Ows says:

    LOL! No big surprise here, you could tell Obama was lying and who in their righ mind really believed they just dumped the body at sea. nice post DP. 

       0 likes

  2. Merlin says:

    The American troops should have chopped up his body and used it for dog meat.  

       0 likes

  3. Natsman says:

    Obama?  LIE?  Surely not…

    He’s as pure as the driven snow, even if his middle name IS Hussein, and he was born somewhere other than America.

       0 likes

  4. john says:

    Yes, I must admit at the time I thought the US Navy did a rather good job at pretending to carry out Barry’s orders, short of some idiot with footage of a sack of potatoes being thrown overboard as proof of Bin Laden being laid to rest.

    Clearly this was the work of Sarha Palin and other right-wing loonies and they will be exposed by the fearless BBC (don’t spare the expenses) North American Army.

    On the other hand : 

    Mr. President – Welcome to B-BBC , Do you have any other fantastic lies you would like to share with us this evening ?

       0 likes

  5. Ivan Pope says:

    You know, if you read the Stratfor emails the guy is actually just suggesting that the body was flown back to the US. He doesn’t have any knowledge, he’s just making it up. Interesting, yes, but hardly evidence of anything. Get off your hobby horse.

       0 likes

  6. Merlin says:

    Ivan it seems that you already had your mind made up either way. I wonder why?

       0 likes

  7. deegee says:

    This story is well, odd. If the Americans wanted a DNA test they could have cut off a finger. They could have taken a swab of the inner skin of his cheek. If all those crime procedurals I see are accurate they could have taken some hair or nail clippings. Why take the whole body?

    If they had made a mistake and offed the wrong guy what did they plan to do? Return it to Pakistan with an apology? Odd-Odd-Odd! *DONT_KNOW*  

       0 likes

  8. Umbongo says:

    Whatever the truth of the matter, let’s hope that the Americans wrapped Bin Laden’s remains in pig skin before burial/cremation which, when we were made of sterner stuff, is how the British in India dealt with the remains of Moslem rebels.

       0 likes

  9. Wally Greeninker says:

    Has there been so much as a hint on the BBC of the highly detailed account by a ‘Washington insider’ that the operation to kill Osama was the result of Panetta having to work around Obama’s dithering and unwillingness to act. In the end, the president had to be virtually tricked into consenting and was only informed that the operation was taking place when it was too late for a cancellation by him to be practical.

    http://thesundowner.wordpress.com/2011/05/04/white-house-insider-obama-hesitated-%E2%80%93-panetta-issued-order-to-kill-osama-bin-laden/

       0 likes

    • deegee says:

      There is nothing dishonourable about refusing to be involved in assassination. I can understand the legal and moral arguments, for and against, in general and specifically re: Bin Laden.

      What is dishonourable is being against assassination and then taking credit. Reminds one of a certain Nobel Peace Prize winner accepting a prize for future achievements.

         0 likes

  10. B G says:

    So it’s not a fact David? Now its an unsubstantiated rumour still worth reporting? Oh Dear!

       0 likes

    • David Preiser (USA) says:

      BG, I see you’re perfectly happy to ignore the BBC’s double standard when it comes to rushing to report rumors and questionable stories.

      That’s two new defenders of the indefensible just for this odd story. How strange. Where do you come from?

         0 likes