Director of public prosecution to review earlier decision following jury’s finding that newspaper vendor was ‘unlawfully killed’ Britain’s most senior prosecutor has said he was considering whether to prosecute the police officer who attacked Ian Tomlinson for manslaughter after an inquest jury found that the newspaper seller had been unlawfully killed. Tomlinson, 47, had been trying to walk home from work through the G20 demonstrations near the Bank of England when he was attacked from behind by a Metropolitan police constable, Simon Harwood, a member of the Met’s Territorial Support Group (TSG). Returning their verdict after three hours of deliberation on Tuesday, jurors said Tomlinson died of internal bleeding in the abdomen after being struck with a baton and pushed to the ground with “excessive and unreasonable” force on 7.20pm on 1 April 2009. Within minutes of the verdict being announced, the director of public prosecutions, Keir Starmer, said a “thorough review” of his earlier decision not to bring criminal prosecutions against Harwood had begun. “That review will now take place and will be thorough,” he said. “It will take into account all of the evidence now available, including any new evidence that emerged at the inquest, the issues left by the coroner to the jury and the conclusions they reached. The review will be conducted as quickly as is compatible with the care and rigour required in a thorough exercise.” For legal reasons, the jury’s verdict could not name Harwood or apportion blame. The verdict, however, did say that Tomlinson’s death came after he was “fatally injured. This was as a result of a baton strike from behind and a push in the back by a police officer which caused Mr Tomlinson to fall heavily,” the verdict said. “Both the baton strike and the push were excessive and unreasonable. As a result, Mr Tomlinson suffered internal bleeding which led to his collapse within a few minutes and his subsequent death.” Their finding noted Tomlinson, a father of nine, was walking away from police, obeying orders and posed “no threat” when he was struck by Harwood. There were shouts of “yes” from Tomlinson’s family when the verdict was returned. His son Paul King said afterwards: “We’ve got a long way ahead of us. We’ve been let down for two years. It’s been proven that Ian was killed unlawfully. Now we’d like to go to court and continue with the manslaughter charges.” The Met expressed “profound condolences” to Tomlinson’s family, saying in a statement: “It is a matter of deep regret that the actions of an MPS officer have been found to have caused the death of a member of the public.” The Tomlinson inquest verdict comes just over a year after the Met was forced to accept one of its officers almost certainly killed Blair Peach, an anti-fascist protester, at a protest in Southall, west London, in 1979. The Met kept a report into Peach’s death secret for more than 30 years. It revealed he was killed by an officer from the Special Patrol Group – the precursor to the TSG. Police initially denied Tomlinson had had contact with police officers before his death. Reporters were briefed that Tomlinson had died of “natural causes”. Tomlinson’s family, who have alleged that police covered up information about involvement in his death, were told he probably died of a heart attack before a postmortem had even taken place. They were discouraged from talking to reporters investigating the death and told Tomlinson has simply been seen to “run out of batteries”. Details about a bruise on his leg and puncture marks in his skin, now known to have been caused by a baton strike and dog bite, were also withheld from them. However, the release six days later of footage obtained by the Guardian showing the newspaper seller’s encounter with Harwood prompted the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) to launch a criminal inquiry. The footage was played repeatedly during the five-week hearing at the International Dispute Resolution Centre in Fleet Street, London. Starmer said last July he did not believe a prosecution was possible because of complications on medical evidence, which he said meant prosecutors would struggle to prove a cause of death. There were two divergent explanations of Tomlinson’s death. The first pathologist to conduct a postmortem examination on the body, Dr Freddy Patel, said he died of a heart attack as a result of coronary heart disease. He was contradicted by three other pathologists who examined Tomlinson’s body, all of whom found he died of internal bleeding in the abdomen. Starmer said last year that changes in Patel’s evidence about the extent of blood found in Tomlinson’s abdomen rendered any prosecution particularly difficult. However, Patel made several changes to his evidence in the course of the inquest, and was undermined by a number of experts, including a heart specialist who said defibrillator readings showing Tomlinson’s heart attack were “entirely inconsistent” with Patel’s theory. The jury was also told that Patel had twice been suspended by the General Medical Council disciplinary panel in recent months after being found guilty of a botched postmortem and dishonesty. Reviewing his decision, Starmer will have to consider the new medical evidence as well as the jury verdict. The jury had to be satisfied “beyond reasonable doubt” that Tomlinson’s injuries were caused by the trauma of the fall – the same burden of proof that would be applied in a criminal trial. Starmer’s initial decision not to prosecute was backed by the attorney general, Dominic Grieve, but prompted widespread anger and questions in parliament. The Met commissioner, Sir Paul Stephenson, said at the time he could understand the “outrage” over the decision not to prosecute Harwood. The IPCC is also known to have believed there was sufficient evidence to bring a manslaughter charge. In a statement released through his lawyers on Tuesday, Harwood said he was “sorry” Tomlinson died, but denied he intended to hurt him. “The mass of video and other evidence gathered by the IPCC now presents a picture very different from the one PC Harwood had on the day,” his lawyer said. “In particular, he wishes that he had known then all that he now knows about Mr Tomlinson’s movements and fragile state of health.” Ian Tomlinson G20 London Metropolitan police Police Paul Lewis guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Director of public prosecution to review earlier decision following jury’s finding that newspaper vendor was ‘unlawfully killed’ Britain’s most senior prosecutor has said he was considering whether to prosecute the police officer who attacked Ian Tomlinson for manslaughter after an inquest jury found that the newspaper seller had been unlawfully killed. Tomlinson, 47, had been trying to walk home from work through the G20 demonstrations near the Bank of England when he was attacked from behind by a Metropolitan police constable, Simon Harwood, a member of the Met’s Territorial Support Group (TSG). Returning their verdict after three hours of deliberation on Tuesday, jurors said Tomlinson died of internal bleeding in the abdomen after being struck with a baton and pushed to the ground with “excessive and unreasonable” force on 7.20pm on 1 April 2009. Within minutes of the verdict being announced, the director of public prosecutions, Keir Starmer, said a “thorough review” of his earlier decision not to bring criminal prosecutions against Harwood had begun. “That review will now take place and will be thorough,” he said. “It will take into account all of the evidence now available, including any new evidence that emerged at the inquest, the issues left by the coroner to the jury and the conclusions they reached. The review will be conducted as quickly as is compatible with the care and rigour required in a thorough exercise.” For legal reasons, the jury’s verdict could not name Harwood or apportion blame. The verdict, however, did say that Tomlinson’s death came after he was “fatally injured. This was as a result of a baton strike from behind and a push in the back by a police officer which caused Mr Tomlinson to fall heavily,” the verdict said. “Both the baton strike and the push were excessive and unreasonable. As a result, Mr Tomlinson suffered internal bleeding which led to his collapse within a few minutes and his subsequent death.” Their finding noted Tomlinson, a father of nine, was walking away from police, obeying orders and posed “no threat” when he was struck by Harwood. There were shouts of “yes” from Tomlinson’s family when the verdict was returned. His son Paul King said afterwards: “We’ve got a long way ahead of us. We’ve been let down for two years. It’s been proven that Ian was killed unlawfully. Now we’d like to go to court and continue with the manslaughter charges.” The Met expressed “profound condolences” to Tomlinson’s family, saying in a statement: “It is a matter of deep regret that the actions of an MPS officer have been found to have caused the death of a member of the public.” The Tomlinson inquest verdict comes just over a year after the Met was forced to accept one of its officers almost certainly killed Blair Peach, an anti-fascist protester, at a protest in Southall, west London, in 1979. The Met kept a report into Peach’s death secret for more than 30 years. It revealed he was killed by an officer from the Special Patrol Group – the precursor to the TSG. Police initially denied Tomlinson had had contact with police officers before his death. Reporters were briefed that Tomlinson had died of “natural causes”. Tomlinson’s family, who have alleged that police covered up information about involvement in his death, were told he probably died of a heart attack before a postmortem had even taken place. They were discouraged from talking to reporters investigating the death and told Tomlinson has simply been seen to “run out of batteries”. Details about a bruise on his leg and puncture marks in his skin, now known to have been caused by a baton strike and dog bite, were also withheld from them. However, the release six days later of footage obtained by the Guardian showing the newspaper seller’s encounter with Harwood prompted the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) to launch a criminal inquiry. The footage was played repeatedly during the five-week hearing at the International Dispute Resolution Centre in Fleet Street, London. Starmer said last July he did not believe a prosecution was possible because of complications on medical evidence, which he said meant prosecutors would struggle to prove a cause of death. There were two divergent explanations of Tomlinson’s death. The first pathologist to conduct a postmortem examination on the body, Dr Freddy Patel, said he died of a heart attack as a result of coronary heart disease. He was contradicted by three other pathologists who examined Tomlinson’s body, all of whom found he died of internal bleeding in the abdomen. Starmer said last year that changes in Patel’s evidence about the extent of blood found in Tomlinson’s abdomen rendered any prosecution particularly difficult. However, Patel made several changes to his evidence in the course of the inquest, and was undermined by a number of experts, including a heart specialist who said defibrillator readings showing Tomlinson’s heart attack were “entirely inconsistent” with Patel’s theory. The jury was also told that Patel had twice been suspended by the General Medical Council disciplinary panel in recent months after being found guilty of a botched postmortem and dishonesty. Reviewing his decision, Starmer will have to consider the new medical evidence as well as the jury verdict. The jury had to be satisfied “beyond reasonable doubt” that Tomlinson’s injuries were caused by the trauma of the fall – the same burden of proof that would be applied in a criminal trial. Starmer’s initial decision not to prosecute was backed by the attorney general, Dominic Grieve, but prompted widespread anger and questions in parliament. The Met commissioner, Sir Paul Stephenson, said at the time he could understand the “outrage” over the decision not to prosecute Harwood. The IPCC is also known to have believed there was sufficient evidence to bring a manslaughter charge. In a statement released through his lawyers on Tuesday, Harwood said he was “sorry” Tomlinson died, but denied he intended to hurt him. “The mass of video and other evidence gathered by the IPCC now presents a picture very different from the one PC Harwood had on the day,” his lawyer said. “In particular, he wishes that he had known then all that he now knows about Mr Tomlinson’s movements and fragile state of health.” Ian Tomlinson G20 London Metropolitan police Police Paul Lewis guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …On MLK Quote Bandwagomeers MLK Quote Engraving “We have to change our way of thinking or perish.” Follow Up of the Day: Fake MLK Quote Origin Found On Facebook … Follow Up of the Day: Tipster Megan writes in to inform me that Patient Zero of the now-infamous misattributed MLK … That MLK Quote in Your Status is Fake – Failbook – Funny Facebook … Funny Facebook Fails – That MLK Quote in Your Status is Fake. Who Wrote the Fake MLK Viral Quote? | Peter Kafka | MediaMemo … I didn’t start the MLK quote and I didn’t do it on purpose. I checked before posting but not enough. My mistake.” I believe, the article he’s referring to is this one from Salon.com. View Comments Tagged: Media, News, Social, Facebook, … Fake MLK Quote Yesterday, I saw a quote from Martin Luther King Jr. fly across my twitter feed: ”I mourn the loss of thousands of precious lives, but I will not rejoice in the death of one, not even an enemy.” – Martin Luther King, Jr”. … [H]ard|OCP – MLK Internet Quote On Osama Is Made Up If you use Twitter, Facebook or e-mail you have no doubt seen the made up MLK quote floating around the internet since we deep sixed OBL. The problem is, like most things floating around on social networking sites, the quote is fake. … FowlerTax1 says: Breakdown of that fake MLK quote so prevalent yesterday http://bit.ly/mCEhRe
Continue reading …Egyptian mother: my son’s wife will be executed in Iraq ! Al Qaeda Like Rebels Mutilate Libyan Soldiers Who Surrender Under NATO Bombs! Where Our Media Now? Democracy in Islam – Part 4 At War: Bin Laden's Death Expected to Have Little Impact on Al … Today, Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia is a shell of the organization that was once led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi , the one that beheaded hostages on camera and controlled significant portions of the country. Although the group still conducts … 411daily: OSAMA BIN LADE COVERS TIME MAGAZINE IN STYLE. The cover features bin Laden’s face covered by a red “X.” This image has become iconic after its use with Hitler, Saddam Hussein and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi . The bin Laden cover was illustrated by Tim O’Brien, who also designed the cover … Bin Laden's Death Expected to Have Little Impact on Al Qaeda in … Today, Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia is a shell of the organization that was once led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi , the one that beheaded hostages on camera and controlled significant portions of the country. Although the group still conducts … Handing Out Sweets in Jordan for OBL's Martyrdom Political analyst and expert on Islamic groups, Dr. Muhammad Abu Rumman, said Osama bin Laden is more popular in the Jordanian street than his second in command, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi , who is from Jordan. … islampolicy: The Shaykh has been martyred, our struggle persists…. Muzafar Qutz, Mohammed Al-Fateh, Sulayman Al-Qanooni, Barborosa Hayreddin Pasha, Tareq bin Al-Ziyad, Umar Al-Mukhtar, Abdullah Al-Azam, Mohammed Atta, Emir Khattab, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi …(may the Mercy of Allah Azawjal descend on them). … WHATRULOOKING4 says: – rashard mendenhall – mothers day gift – kentucky derby – abu musab al zarqawi – teacher appreciation week – martin…
Continue reading …FTD.COM – Flowers Online | Roses, Fresh Flowers, Plants and Gift … Send Flowers Send Flowers Online Purchase Flowers Online – 5 Suggestions For Sending Flowers Cheap Inexpensive Flowers OnlineDeliver flowers cheap, will not deliver cheap flowers!Whenever you are brief on dollars however you wish to deliver a person flow. Where is the best place to buy flowers online and have them … Where is the best place to buy flowers online and have them shipped? Preferallby somewhere not too expensive. I have to send them to a hospital in another state. ThanksGo someplace like ftd.com that has a network of local shops. you can … Send Flowers all over the world | Killer Articles The florists are selling both fresh and dried flowers. Online florists are offering services of delivering flowers online to you based on your request. It is easily for you to order the flowers online and get the services of online … The Best Online Designer Florist | Monster Articles The florists are selling both fresh and dried flowers. Online florists are offering services of delivering flowers online to you based on your request. It is easily for you to order the flowers online and get the services of online … The Best Online Designer Florist | Articles Zilla The florists are selling both fresh and dried flowers. Online florists are offering services of delivering flowers online to you based on your request. It is easily for you to order the flowers online and get the services of online … HazarunNielson0 says: http://cos-news.blogspot.com/2011/05/two-horny-lesbian-christmas-girls.html closet doors diamond butte usb adapter merit flowers online
Continue reading …Acting prime minister José Socrates says Portugal must slash its deficit from 9.1% to 5.9% this year under terms of deal Portugal’s caretaker government said that it had negotiated a €78bn bailout deal with the European Union and the International Monetary Fund, but was waiting for opposition parties to agree. Acting prime minister José Sócrates said that, under the terms of the deal, Portugal must slash its budget deficit from 9.1% to 5.9% this year, and then reduce it to 3% by 2013. “The government has today reached an agreement with the international institutions regarding the financial aid to our country,” Sócrates said in a televised address. “Naturally, there are no financial assistance programs that are not demanding,” he added. “The times we live in continue to imply efforts and a lot of work. Let no one doubt that.” Sócrates said that an austerity programme to bring the deficit down this year would basically imitate the plan which was thrown out by the Portuguese parliament in March, causing president Aníbal Cavaco Silva to call a snap election for 5 June. Two weeks later, Sócrates finally admitted that Portugal would join fellow eurozone countries Greece and Ireland in requesting a bail-out. He said that Portugal had “got a good deal” and that further cuts to civil service pay would not be needed. “We will beat this crisis,” he added. A government official told Associated Press that the €78bn package included aid for Portugal’s cash-strapped banks. The Público newspaper reported austerity measures would include cuts to some, higher-scale state pensions. Basic pension rates and the minimum wage would stay in place as would free schooling and health services, the newspaper reported. The retirement age would not be changed, it added. Sócrates insisted that the bailout package required the country to carry out the same austerity measures rejected in parliament by the opposition centre-right social democrats, who are currently ahead in the opinion polls. Those polls suggest that neither party can win an absolute majority. Publico reported that the social democrats would also have to approve the aid package. “With this agreement the country obtains for the second time, now in different terms, the support and the confidence of the international institutions based on the program that the government presented in March,” Sócrates said. European finance ministers have set a target date of 16 May for the approval of the agreement, and are demanding all main political parties sign off on the terms. IMF Portugal Global economy Europe Economics Giles Tremlett guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Click here to view this media We know Republicans seem to have a deep-seated belief that only torture will keep us safe from the terrorists, even though the people who do real intelligence gathering can tell you that just wrong: It’s ineffective and counterproductive — not to mention morally depraved . Not that any of this seems to deter conservatives. So the spectacle of every right-winger on the planet rushing to claim that it was torture that provided the intelligence leading to the killing of Osama bin Laden was nothing if not predictable. And of course, it turned out to be wholly wrong. For instance, here were Rudy Giuliani and Sean Hannity last night on Fox . Most of the segment was devoted to claiming that it was “aggressive interrogation techniques” that provided the key intelligence to finding Bin Laden, though at one point Hannity actually commended President Obama — and then lied about him: HANNITY: But we needed the intelligence to confirm that right. Does this now bring this debate back to the forefront? And by the way, and I give President Obama a lot of credit here. Because I thought it was a gutsy choice. GIULIANI: It was. HANNITY: A gutsy choice, not to drop a 2,000-pound bomb but to send these guys in, so we can confirm that it’s him. GIULIANI: When you consider everything that could have gone wrong and how President Obama would look today if it did, it took a lot of courage to do that and I do admire that. And I think there’s a good day the last two days for both President Obama and President Bush. Because I think President Bush set in motion all of the things that led to this. And then President Obama picked up on it and carried it out. And I give both of them a tremendous amount of credits. HANNITY: And I do too. And this is a good day for this country and we’ll going to talk to Todd Beamer’s dad who’s going to be on the program. And — is going to be on the program tonight. And General Tommy Franks is on tonight. But as I look at this, would President Obama not now realize that without the intelligence, he wouldn’t have had the ability to make this decision, I would hope that it might change his mind. GIULIANI: Maybe it will. And the reality is he also at that very last minute when he’s made the decision had to know that intelligence had to know, 50/50. I mean, you never know. HANNITY: You’ll never know. GIULIANI: They were going in there to get Osama Bin Laden but who knows if it wasn’t somebody that just looked like him or was like him. The better your intelligence, the more accurate your decision making and the safer we are. And the reality is, and I was glad to hear the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton say this. This is not the end, we are in the middle of this, and we can’t let down our guard. We shouldn’t be leaving Afghanistan as a result of this. We shouldn’t be leaving Iraq, we should remain there to get the job done. HANNITY: I agree but this is where I find myself a little conflicted here because this is almost the opposite of what candidate Obama said he would do. And maybe for the first time he’s grown in office. Oh, yeah, it was almost the opposite: — if by “almost” you mean “the opposite of”: enlarge Now, you can argue that Hannity and Giuliani couldn’t have known that they were 100 percent wrong in their speculation, since John Brennan didn’t officially shoot it down until today. But in fact, we already knew that waterboarding had nothing to do with this intelligence. It had already been reported by the Associated Press : Mohammed did not discuss al-Kuwaiti while being subjected to the simulated drowning technique known as waterboarding, former officials said. He acknowledged knowing him many months later under standard interrogation, they said, leaving it once again up for debate as to whether the harsh technique was a valuable tool or an unnecessarily violent tactic. It took years of work before the CIA identified the courier’s real name: Sheikh Abu Ahmed, a Pakistani man born in Kuwait. When they did identify him, he was nowhere to be found. Once again, smart, lawful intelligence gathering made the difference here. I gather that this is anathema to the conservative mindset, however. No wonder they’re so incompetent.
Continue reading …Liberals came in a distant third in Monday’s elections with just 34 seats giving Stephen Harper’s Conservatives a majority Michael Ignatieff, the man once hailed as the “bionic liberal”, has stepped down as Canada’s Liberal leader after leading the party to its worst ever election defeat. The Liberals came in a distant third in Monday night’s elections with 34 seats, giving Stephen Harper’s Conservatives, on 167 seats, a majority in the 308-seat House of Commons. The collapse of the Liberals, the traditional party of governance for the 20th century, has redrawn the map of Canadian politics. The leftwing New Democratic party, led by Jack Layton, nearly tripled their strength to 102 seats, emerging for the first time as the official opposition. Voters also elected the first Green party MP, Elizabeth May, in British Columbia, and threw out all but four members of the French-speaking separatist Bloc Québécois. Ignatieff’s humiliation was compounded by the loss of his own seat. On Tuesday morning, the exhausted-looking leader blamed the Liberals’ collapse on negative attack ads. Canadians liked him once they got to know him, he told a press conference, but “there were these negative attack ads that made it very difficult for me to connect with people who weren’t in the room,” he said. “I had a very large square put around my neck for a number of years.” But Ignatieff, who became a public figure in the 1990s as the telegenic host of BBC’s Late Show before decamping for a job at Harvard as a human rights professor, said he took responsibility for the defeat. “The only thing Canadians like less than a loser is a sore loser and I go out of politics with my head held high,” he said. The party will meet next week to choose an interim leader. Ignatieff said he wanted to return to academia, the career he gave up in 2005 to make his first run for office in a suburban Toronto district, though he said he had had no offers as yet. Ignatieff, who was cast by some party grandees as the great hope for an ailing party in search of a charismatic leader, became leader in 2009. But under his leadership, the Liberals were reduced to less than 19% of the popular vote and Harper got his first majority after five years of minority rule. Commentators said Harper now had an historic opportunity to move the centre of Canadian politics further to the right. In the immediate future, the Conservative majority gives Harper a chance to push through an economic agenda of corporate tax breaks and government spending cuts. At a press conference in Calgary on Tuesday, he said the result would bring stability to Canada, which has seen four elections in seven years. He also offered reassurances about an immediate lurch to the right because of pressure from his party’s right wing. “We are intensely aware that we are and we must be the government of all Canadians, including those who did not vote for us,” Harper said. Layton, whose party won more than 30% of the popular vote, must now fashion a credible opposition force from a large and inexperienced group. The party’s biggest wins came from Quebec, where it became the default choice for voters fed up with the Bloc Québécois. One of the winners from Quebec on Monday night, Ruth Ellen Brosseau, works in a bar in Ottawa, does not speak French, and may not have ever visited her district, Canadian press reported. She also spent part of the campaign on holiday in Las Vegas – but she still took 40% of the vote. Other prominent casualties include the leader of the Bloc Québécois, Gilles Duceppe, who stood down after his party lost nearly all of its members. The Liberal party collapse claimed other high-profile figures. In Toronto, Ken Dryden, a goalie in the National Hockey League before entering law and politics, lost to a conservative. However, Justin Trudeau, the son of the late prime minister Pierre Trudeau, held on to his seat in Quebec. Michael Ignatieff Canada Stephen Harper Suzanne Goldenberg guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …While US officials amend narrative of raid, Abbottabad residents describe Bin Laden’s ‘mansion’ and the brothers who built it By the time Pakistani soldiers lifted the cordon around Osama bin Laden’s house in the garrison town of Abbottabad, triggering a media stampede, the most obvious traces of its infamous resident had been effaced. The American soldiers who had swept in aboard four helicopters on Sunday night had scoured the three-storey building, taking away computer hard disks and a trove of documents – as well as Bin Laden’s bloodied body, which was later buried at sea. The following day, Pakistani intelligence – angered at not having been informed of the raid, and embarrassed that it took place under their noses – made a second sweep. Tractors carted away furniture and other belongings. But it was impossible to erase every trace of the drama that ended the manhunt. Beyond the gates, children in flip-flops and salwar kameez fished chunks of blackened helicopter debris from the surrounding fields, flung there after a US helicopter that failed to take off was blown up by its own soldiers. One boy produced a jagged, soot-encrusted chunk of metal, perhaps part of an exhaust, from a drain. “This is silver!” declared 12-year-old Yasser. A nervous looking intelligence official, loitering nearby, grabbed the child by the hand and led him away. Fascination with the raid was not confined to Abbottabad. In Washington, fresh details were being revealed by the White House, some which contradicted the earlier version of events surrounding the killing of their most wanted man. In the immediate hours after Bin Laden’s death, US officials had briefed that he had put up a fight and shot at the Seal 6 team that had stormed the second and third floors of his hideout. Other details suggested he had used one of his wives as a human shield. The White House confirmed that neither was true. Bin Laden was unarmed, was shot in the head and chest, and his wife had been wounded in the leg while rushing towards the special forces before he was killed. The photographs of his body, the spokesman said, were probably too gruesome to be released. Another narrative to change somewhat concerned the property itself. Up close, Bin Laden’s house, a tall, unlovely piece of architecture, towering over the policemen guarding the gate, was not quite the million dollar mansion described by officials. The walls were high, certainly, but not unusually so for north-western Pakistan, where privacy is jealously guarded. The paint was peeling, there was no air conditioning. But it was the only house in the neighbourhood with barbed wire and surveillance cameras. And it towered over its only neighbour, a small, ramshackle dwelling made of rough bricks with plastic sheeting for windows. The people inside were scared and apprehensive. Zain Muhammad, an elderly man perched on a rope bed on the porch, said Pakistani soldiers had come in the night and taken away his son, Shamraiz. He produced a photo of a smiling man with a moustache in his early 40s. “I’ve no idea where he is. The soldiers won’t allow us to leave, not even to fetch water.” The residents had had their suspicions about the house across the street, they said: the thick walls and barbed wire, and the two secretive brothers who owned it, described as ethnic Pashtuns. “They told us they had to protect themselves because they had enemies back in their home village. They said they had to screen off the house to protect their women. A lot of us thought they were smugglers,” said Abid Khan. The house, it turned out, had been on the radar of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) for more than eight years. Construction started around 2001. Two years later, when it was still unfinished, ISI agents raided it in search of Abu Faraj al-Libbi, a senior Bin Laden lieutenant, but left empty-handed, an ISI official said. Around 2005, Bin Laden moved in, according to US officials – around about the time of the devastating Kashmir earthquake that killed 73,000 people in October of that year. As the wounded flooded into Abbottabad’s military hospital a mile away – so many that doctors set up a tent on the main lawn – the Saudi fugitive and his clan were settling into this house down the road. There had been great speculation about his whereabouts. Across the border in Afghanistan, US soldiers distributed matchboxes with Bin Laden’s picture and details of a $25m bounty. In Pakistan, the US embassy paid for expensive television ads appealing for information. “Who can stop these terrorists? Only you!” implored a voice as images of Bin Laden and 13 henchmen flashed across the screen. The then president, Pervez Musharraf, insisted the Americans were wrong. His security forces had “broken the vertical and horizontal command and communication links of al-Qaida” in Pakistan, he boasted. “There are a lot of people who say that Osama bin Laden is here in Pakistan,” he said. “Please come and show us where.” In Abbottabad, the two Pashtun brothers had finally completed their house, less than a mile from the Pakistan Military Academy where Musharraf himself had been trained. One of them was Bin Laden’s courier, the man trusted to take his messages to the outside world. CIA officials learned his nom de guerre from an al-Qaida militant picked up in Iraq: Sheikh Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti. US officials described him a Pakistani brought up in Kuwait. To the locals, however, he was simply a Pashtun businessman with an identity card issued in Charsadda, north of Peshawar. He and his brother seemed to be known by several names: Arshad and Tariq Khan, but also Rasheed, Ahmed and Nadeem. The gas bill was in the name of the elder brother, Arshad Khan, presumed to be the “courier” sought by the Americans. Oddly, the house had four separate gas connections. They kept largely to themselves, coming and going in a small white Suzuki van and a red jeep. But they joined in with neighbourhood rituals, condoling the bereaved, celebrating weddings and births. It may have been a necessary part of the cover story; to have done otherwise could have aroused greater suspicion. “They weren’t chatty,” said Rasheed, a 32-year-old local shopkeeper, lounging behind his counter. He sold the brothers salty biscuits and chewy toffees when they visited with their seven children. He refused to believe they had any links to Kuwait. “We absolutely believed they were Pashtuns,” he said. But he had noticed something odd. He had worked on the house as a labourer when it was being built, and had wondered why the brothers insisted that the walls should be 3ft thick. In the end, the two brothers were Bin Laden’s downfall. The CIA learned of Arshad Khan’s identity four years ago, and after a two-year hunt learned that he lived in the Abbottabad area. Then, last August, a Pakistani working for the CIA followed one of the brothers as he drove his Suzuki van from Peshawar, leading them to the house. In February, the CIA became convinced Bin Laden was inside, leading to last Sunday’s raid. The two brothers were killed, according to the CIA, along with Bin Laden and one of his sons, thought to be Khalid. Many details, however, remain blurred. US officials amended their initial version to reveal that a woman who was killed during the raid on the compound was not Bin Laden’s wife. It is also not clear how Bin Laden, who was cornered in a third-floor room now marked by a shattered windowpane, resisted as the US soldiers barged into his room. President Barack Obama insists the Navy Seals would have detained him if they could, but it is hard to imagine US officials would have relished either a trial or the spectacle of the al-Qaida leader being held in Guantánamo Bay. Bin Laden’s erstwhile neighbours, now in the gaze of the world’s media, congregated outside his house. Some seemed angry, others bemused. One bearded man scolded his friends for speaking to the foreign press; others seemed to relish the attention, presenting themselves for detailed interviews about their brushes with the neighbour they never knew. A few displayed pro-Osama bravado. “I would have opened fire on the Americans myself if I had to defend him!” declared one man. Others worried about more material problems. “It’s going to destroy property prices in this area,” muttered one. And there was a surreal moment when an Osama lookalike – a man with a thin face and a full, scraggly beard – turned before the front gate, triggering laughs and a flutter of camera shutters. But there was no sign of life from a large neighbouring house, about 50 metres from Bin Laden’s back wall, which also had a high perimeter wall and two watchtowers. Neighbours said it had been built three years ago by a man whose family has long owned property in the area. The nameplate read: Major Amir Aziz. Locals said he was a serving Pakistan army officer. Despite repeated rings on the doorbell, he refused to answer. It is unclear what will happen now to the house that Osama built. It has become an embarrassment for Pakistan, a reminder of the fact that the world’s most famous fugitive managed to live in suburban comfort, apparently undetected, for up to six years. Some fear it could become a shrine of sorts for al-Qaida supporters, and so it may be destroyed. But failing that, it may simply be rented out again. It is, after all, an attractive property – spacious, well located, and fully fitted with advanced security features. In fact it’s just the sort of house that is favoured by security-conscious US diplomats elsewhere in Pakistan. Perhaps they might consider taking it. Osama bin Laden Middle East Pakistan United States Obama administration US politics US foreign policy US military al-Qaida Global terrorism Declan Walsh guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …enlarge Credit: AFP News spread quickly. Click here to view this media Certainly no shortage of reports, spin and observations coming from our own mainstream media, I thought I would take a look and see how the rest of the world was reacting to the news of the bin Laden death. And of course, there was plenty (and still is). Like all the news today, it’s coming thick and fast and the observations are running the gamut. Starting off this roundup of news reports and reactions, I’m beginning with the first hour of BBC Radio 4′s Today Program which featured initial reactions and reports, as the attack on the Bin Laden compound took place only three hours earlier. It’s the player at the top. Quickly followed by a Special program from the BBC Asian Service , getting reaction from members of the Asian community around London and updating the initial news reports. Click here to view this media Shortly after the BBC reports are three news bulletins from Radio Pakistan (might as well check out the source) beginning with the 12:00 noon news. There was no mention on the 8:00 news so it wasn’t included. Click here to view this media Next up is a special program from Radio Pakistan on the bin Laden news – this one is in Urdu and was aired shortly after the initial reports. Click here to view this media From Radio Algeria comes their Morning News, this time in French and it seems to have not been as big a deal in Algeria as one would imagine, since the hour newscast was mostly taken up with Football news (which was cut out). Different strokes . . . Click here to view this media The BBC World Service ran a Special edition of their Newshour program, featuring additional reports from Washington, Kabul and Islamabad. Click here to view this media And finally, ABC Radio National in Australia devoted the first third of their Late Night Live Program to the events of the day, with several interviews and reports. Click here to view this media A very busy day which is pretty far from over. But these are the initial reports and observations during the first few hours after President Obama’s official announcement. After fourteen hours of sifting, listening and editing you get some idea how the rest of the world was reacting to the news. Relief, optimism and caution – and that nagging feeling we haven’t heard the end of it yet. And of course, if this kind of over-the-top wrapup appeals to you, by all means,
Continue reading …