- The Washington Times - Tuesday, May 3, 2011


Will there be a big reveal? The nation’s news organizations are dithering over whether to publish or broadcast images of Osama bin Laden after he was shot, when the White House inevitably releases them. Are the photos “newsworthy” the press asks, or too “grisly” for the American public? Will the images spark a retaliation from al Qaeda or offer definitive proof that the terrorist leader is dead?

The press likely will race to publish or broadcast them the moment they’re released, if only to keep up with the competition - like The Discovery Channel, which already is crafting an “intimate,” hourlong “Bin Laden Dead” documentary. But wait, there’s more. A Poynter Institute online poll of journalists Tuesday found that 96 percent said the images should be published “with care.” And another 93 percent admitted they were “personally interested” in seeing the images for themselves.


“Unless we get a clear explanation of what the government of Pakistan knew about the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden, all foreign aid from American taxpayers to this nation needs to cease. We need to understand whether the government of Pakistan was harboring Osama bin Laden all these years. Further, did the government of Pakistan always know where this terrorist was but instead did not want to bring him to justice in order to continue to receive aid from the U.S.? … I served in Afghanistan for 2 1/2 years and am familiar with the sanctuary being provided to Islamic terrorists in Pakistan. Many believe the central headquarters of the Taliban, and Mullah Omar, are located in Quetta, Pakistan.”

Rep. Allen West, Florida Republican, in a letter to Rep. Kay Granger, Texas Republican and chairwoman of the House subcommittee on state, foreign operations and related programs.


The death of Osama bin Laden was swiftly politicized by the opportunistic press. The weary nation barely had a moment to feel good about U.S. military heroism before the caterwauling set in. Economists now are spinning the bin Laden death as well. The National Inflation Institute, for example, says the war on terrorism will bankrupt the U.S., pointing out that a spare group of Navy SEALs caught bin Laden rather than an army. The interest group fears that the bin Laden victory will prompt more military spending.

“We hate to say it, but if the U.S. experiences hyperinflation within the next few years, it will be what bin Laden wanted. If the incomes and savings of Americans no longer have enough purchasing power to put food on the table and heat homes, many more Americans will die from hyperinflation than were killed on 9/11,” the organization says.

“The macroeconomic effects of bin Ladens death are likely to be minor. They might provide a slight distraction and a temporary boost to spending, consumer confidence, investor confidence, and the like, but that is about it,” observes Independent Institute Research fellow Art Carden.


“Gun-grabbers around the globe believe they have it made. Secretary of State Hillary [Rodham] Clinton recently announced the Obama administration will be working hand in glove with the United Nations to pass a new small-arms treaty. Disguised as an ‘International Arms Control Treaty’ to fight against ‘terrorism,’ ‘insurgency’ and ‘international crime syndicates,’ the U.N.s small-arms treaty is in fact a massive, global gun-control scheme,” Sen. Rand Paul says.

The Kentucky Republican has aligned himself with the National Association for Gun Rights and is now surveying his constituents about the issue. “Ultimately, the U.N.s Small-Arms Treaty is designed to register, ban and confiscate firearms owned by private citizens,” Mr. Paul says.


The CBS Evening News anchor chair shuffle: It’s one liberal making way for another, says Media Research Center researcher Geoffrey Dickens.

“CBS News officially announced that longtime correspondent Scott Pelley will take the reins from departing anchor Katie Couric. A review of our archive reveals Pelley will most likely continue the long tradition of liberal bias advanced by his anchor predecessors Couric, Dan Rather and Walter Cronkite.”


• 93 percent of Americans approve of the U.S. military action that killed Osama bin Laden.

• 89 percent credit the U.S. military “a great deal” for the killing of bin Laden, 9 percent credit the military a “moderate” amount.

• 62 percent credit the CIA “a great deal,” 26 percent credit the agency a “moderate” amount.

• 35 percent credit the President Obama “a great deal,” 36 percent credit him a “moderate” amount.

• 22 percent credit President George W. Bush “a great deal,” 30 percent credit him a “moderate” amount.

• 79 percent say it’s “extremely” or “very” important to the U.S. that bin Laden was killed; 1 percent say it is not important.

Source: A Gallup Poll of 645 adults conducted May 2.

Cat calls, horse laughs and doggerel to jharper@washingtontimes.com



Click to Read More

Click to Hide