Yesterday Glenn Beck "congratulated" President Obama on the killing of Osama bin Laden, but today Beck seems to be changing his tune. In the audio segment to the left, Beck seems to join up with the "deathers" who believe that bin Laden may not have been killed at all. Beck does not clearly spell out all the details of his theory, but at the very least Beck seems skeptical of the United States government claim that bin Laden was shot and buried at sea.
Beck asks again and again "Why did we shoot him?" in reference to bin Laden. In order to explain why bin Laden was shot, Beck comes up with a number of conspiracy theories. According to Beck, President Obama might have had Osama bin Laden killed instead of captured in order to keep bin Laden from revealing where al-Queda's nuclear bomb is. Under Beck's theory, President Obama is purposefully keeping the al-Queda "nuclear bomb" a secret. Why would Obama do this? Well Beck does not say, but based on Beck's former statements about the President, it appears that Beck is accusing the President of purposefully tryng to set up a nuclear terrorist attack. If true, Beck's theory matches up very closely with the "9/11 truther" conspiracy theory he consistently condemns.
In the alternative, Beck also theorizes that Obama might have "ghosted out" Osama bin Laden. By "ghost out" Beck presumably means that Obama had special forces make it look like bin Laden was killed, when in fact bin Laden was taken alive. Under this theory, the President would be holding bin Laden alive in order to interrogate him, or to protect him.
Both theories are built simply on speculation and some truly "Beckian" logic. Beck wonders why the Navy SEAL team shot bin Laden, but it is not all together clear that bin Laden was unarmed as Beck claims. In addition, when the SEAL team stormed bin Laden room it is possible they shot him based on a apparent threat as opposed to a real threat.
Beck also cites WikiLeaks documents in his claim that al-Queda has a nuclear bomb. What the WikiLeaks actually show is that U.S. security officials briefed other nations in 2009 on the possibility of al-Queda developing, but not possessing, a "dirty bomb." A "dirty bomb" is not nearly as destructive as a fully operational nuclear bomb. In addition, it is worth noting that U.S. intelligence has been wrong about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in the past (i.e. Iraq).
Comments