Examine the photo to the left.Fuck yeah! Our man did what all those Repugnicants couldn't in their wildest dreams!
I'm not talking about the look of self-satisfaction on the guy's face.
Anyway, how do you know that it isn't the kind of smugness that accompanies nationalistic hubris?
Look. While I don't necessarily agree with the way some people express it, we're all relieved that Osama bin Laden is finally gone.
Riiight. That accounts for the "one t' nuthin'" part of the, uh, placard. But examine that for a moment. More specifically, look at the score itself. Shouldn't the bottom number be 3000? That's what's been attributed to him, no?
That wouldn't be as short and sweet.
True, true. Not as pithy at all. But also consider that if you were to include the most oft-cited figure for that inglorious day, then the top number would have to be rounded up, as well.
I know what you're getting at. But the unfortunate victims of collateral damage are the result of a war that my president did not seek. He wasn't even a senator yet when all of that happened.
But he has ordered drone strikes and cluster bombing. And you credit him with bin Laden's death?
Well, sure, he's vowed to protect the American people, and to do that he's gotta make some tough decisions. It's not an enviable job.
But bin Laden's death is a good thing?
Sure he's a horrible terrorist. A dangerous man.
What do you call one who questions the veracity of the claims against him?
Well, since the evidence against him is overwhelming, to question it is just a bit, well, crazy, don't ya think?
So you mean, like, the overwhelming evidence justifying holding prisoners in Guantanamo?
Well, of the ones that are guilty, sure. No, no. Wait. He is a victim of the war he started!
So the Guantanamo defense for those who can't manage to get to Guantanamo?
No, you're putting words in my mouth. He's even admitted his culpability for 9/11.
You mean the admission of guilt that followed his initial denial.
I've seen no reliable evidence of that.
But you've seen evidence linking him to "9/11"?
Not as such. But it's pretty clear he did it.
"Did it"?
You know what I mean. He ordered it. And even if he didn't, he's been pulling Al Qaeda's strings for forever now. He was their leader.
Do you have evidence of that?
Look. It's common knowledge. Even both political parties and other world leaders say so. They wouldn't make this stuff up. Sure, if it were just the Republicans saying so, I'd have to wonder. But it wouldn't benefit everyone else just going along with them.
So that's your evidence?
No. The evidence is available.
What, like, on-line? Have you read it?
Yeah. No. Sort of. It's not like it's secret.
You mean secret, like the interrogation facilities now being credited with providing the evidence of bin Laden's whereabouts?
We know about those, so they're not really secret secret...
Known unknowns, huh?
I didn't say that. Anyway, I'm against torture. I don't believe there is any evidence which shows that it works. To the contrary, actually. And anyway, Osama bin Laden was killed in a firefight. It's not like he was gonna be willing to be arrested.
Which evidence do you think is stronger, or more indisputable, if you like: The evidence linking Osama bin Laden to "9/11" or the evidence that he was killed in a firefight? I have no further questions.
