As a reader of Antiwar.com points out in their backtalk section, there are many reasons to be wary of this big deal Osama bin Laden tape that supposedly implicates him further in the WTC disaster. If they only recently acquired this tape where is the evidence we showed the allies to get them behind the US? As this reader points out from her experience as a court reporter the OBL tape would most likely be thrown out if it were used as evidence in court:
- I was a court reporter for years, and therefore watched the much publicized Osama bin Laden tape and transcription with great curiosity today. In my profession, I learned that the omission of one single word or a misplaced comma can alter the entire context of a sentence or paragraph. For instance, the omission of the word “if” before a sentence transforms the sentence from what might be theoretical musing to a statement of fact. The misplacement of a comma, as in “I don’t know,” to “I don’t, no,” can be catastrophic. Also, there are no “(inaudible words)” acceptable in a valid transcript. A transcript such as was shown on TV today would be thrown out of court, for not only was it non-verbatim, but also it was manhandled in ways unknown to the public for three weeks by the prosecutor and his team. Another observation: At the beginning, bin Laden and his friend are discussing dreams they all had, and these dream segments, related by both, and then a third party, are intertwined with what are purported to be statements of reality. The listener doesn’t know where the dream begins and this alleged reality takes over. I personally find the tape totally unacceptable as any kind of proof of anything.
As expected, the trail of Osama bin Laden has gone cold again. I’m telling you, the US will never find this guy. He’s probably on Uncle Sam’s payroll.