More members of Congress are seeing something cleared for only a select group of Americans: Photos of Osama bin Laden's corpse. 

Republican Sen. James Inhofe told CNN's Eliot Spitzer "In The Arena" on Wednesday he saw about 15 photos of bin Laden's body, most taken at the al Qaeda leader's compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. Three were taken on a naval vessel from which bin Laden was buried at sea after the May 2 U.S. commando raid.

"Pretty gruesome" is how Inhofe described photos of brains hanging out of bin Laden's eye socket. The wound either entered or exited an ear, the Oklahoma senator said.

Many people have demanded proof that bin Laden was killed.

"That was him," said Inhofe, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. "He is gone. He's history."

CLICK HERE for the full story.  FULL POST

Afghan expert Michael Semple explains why the Taliban quietly welcomes the death of al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.

AP's Kimberly Dozier says a journal written by Osama bin Laden shows he remained active in plotting terror attacks.  FULL POST

In our "They Got Away With It" segment, Rolling Stone's Matt Taibbi says a Senate report shows that investment bank Goldman Sachs should face criminal charges (CLICK HERE to read his Rolling Stone article, "The People vs. Goldman Sachs"). FULL POST

Fmr. CIA and Homeland Sec. officer Chad Sweet says Osama bin Laden's journals reveal a strategic divide within al Qaeda. FULL POST

ONLY ON THE BLOG: Answering today’s five OFF-SET questions is Douglas Brinkley, presidential historian, contributor to Vanity Fair, and professor of history at Rice University. He is author of the books “The Wilderness Warrior,” “The Great Deluge” and “The Quiet World.”

Brinkley is editor of “The Reagan Diaries,” and the new book, “The Notes: Ronald Reagan’s Private Collection of Stories and Wisdom.” – a collection of the fortieth president’s favorite quotations, proverbs, excerpts from speeches, poetry and literature, along with his jokes, aphorisms and insights into politics and life.

Nancy Reagan knew of the existence this “secret” collection of 4-by-6 inch note cards, but then they seemed to have disappeared. Where were they found?

Many people knew about the card the collection, but no one knew what happened to them when President Reagan died. They were found at the Reagan Library Archives in bound cardboard boxes when the director was looking for some material for museum display on the centennial of Reagan’s birth. This just happened last fall.

It’s believed that he started keeping these notes in 1954, when he was a spokesman for General Electric. But most of his professional life, he had access to speechwriters—why did he make all of these cards?

These were his ammunition on the rubber chicken circuit. He had to go make so many speeches that, as a comedian does, he was constantly looking for new material. So he collected one-liners and jokes, Bob Hope style. FULL POST

ONLY ON THE BLOG: Answering today's four OFF-SET questions is David Scheffer, the Mayer Brown/Robert A. Helman Professor of Law Director, Center for International Human Rights, at Northwestern University School of Law.

Scheffer, the U.S. Ambassador at Large for War Crimes Issues from 1997 to 2001, is author of the forthcoming book, "All the Missing Souls: A Personal History of the War Crimes Tribunals." (Princeton University Press.) He teaches international human rights law, international criminal law, and corporate compliance and the social mandate.

Today's news: Relatives of Osama bin Laden want proof that the terrorist leader is dead and are calling for an investigation into how he was killed, according to Jean Sasson, an author who helped one of bin Laden's sons write a memoir. "They just really want some answers, and they would just really like to know what exactly happened, why they weren't called," said Sasson, who worked with Omar bin Laden to write a memoir entitled "Growing Up bin Laden."

Her comments come a day after a statement was provided to The New York Times from Omar bin Laden and his brothers - "the lawful children and heirs" of the notorious al Qaeda leader. The statement argued that if bin Laden has been "summarily executed," "international law" might have been "blatantly violated" and that U.S. legal standards were ignored. The statement cites the trials for late Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and late Serbian strongman Slobodan Milosevic, but Osama bin Laden didn't get a "fair trial" or "presumption of innocence until proven guilty by a court of law."

Did the United States violate international law by killing bin Laden? (What does Article 51 of the United Nations charter say? What kind of protections do leaders of international terrorist organizations have?)

Whether the United States violated international law in the killing of Osama bin Laden depends not only on how one defines what has been going on since September 11, 2001, but also how this particular operation was carried out on Pakistani territory. 

The popular and patriotic narrative is that the United States is at war with Al Qaeda; Osama bin Laden commands Al Qaeda; thus under the law of war bin Laden is a legitimate target for a lethal assault regardless of his personal situation (armed or unarmed, awake or sleeping) at any particular time.  

If one assumes that any of the hundreds of U.S.-guided drone attacks on Pakistani territory against Al Qaeda leadership are legal, then firing an assault weapon point-blank at bin Laden in his Pakistani home and thus minimizing civilian casualties should be legal as well. 

The more complicated view is that bin Laden is under federal indictment for terrorist attacks against U.S. civilians and government personnel on U.S. territory and at diplomatic and military targets in various parts of the world—attacks that violate federal antiterrorism law—and as a matter of law enforcement should be captured and brought to trial, preferably before a federal criminal court in the United States.  FULL POST

ONLY ON THE BLOG: Memory expert Joshua Foer documents his foray into the margins of memory and intellectual showmanship in his new book. FULL POST

 In light of recent findings that al Qaeda was mulling targeting railroad lines to mark the 10th anniversary of the September 11th attacks, U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) has proposed an increase in rail security and an Amtrak version of the Secure Flight "no-fly" list.

The proposal stems from material taken from Osama bin Laden's Pakistani compound showing al Qaeda was in the early stages of planning an attack to derail trains on September 11 of this year. Schumer proposed the creation of a "no-ride" list that would check passengers against a list of suspected terrorists to prevent would-be terrorists from boarding trains. The list would be used like the government "no-fly" list that screens air travelers.

ONLY ON THE BLOG: Answering today’s OFF-SET questions is Brian Michael Jenkins, Director of the Mineta Transportation Institute’s (MTI) National Transportation Security Center of Excellence located in San Jose, California. (*More bio below)

Since 9/11, how concerned has the U.S. railroad industry been about a terrorist attack?  

Passenger rail and transit operators have been increasingly concerned about the possibility of a terrorist attack, especially after the 2004 attack on commuter trains in Madrid, the 2005 attack on London's subway, the 2006 attack on commuter trains in Mumbai, and the discovery of numerous other terrorist plots directed against trains and subways.  

Apparently, the al Qaeda terrorist plan involved derailing trains by placing obstructions on tracks. Would that work?

Approximately one-fifth of all terrorist attacks on railway targets involve attempted derailments. FULL POST

Today’s Number of the Day is 20.

That’s the number of years in prison facing Raj Rajaratnam—founder of the Galleon Group hedge fund, which at one point managed upwards of $7 billion in assets.

He was found guilty by a  jury Wednesday on 14 counts– five counts of conspiracy to commit securities fraud and nine counts of securities fraud.

This high-profile case was about insider trading. On the recordings played at the trial by the prosecution—Rajaratnam had been wire-tapped—he discussed proprietary information on big companies, including Goldman Sachs. Rajaratnam received information from Rajat Gupta, a former Goldman board member, which he used to make $17 million in illegal profits.

When he testified in March, Goldman CEO Lloyd Blankfein said that Gupta knew that he had a duty to keep what happened in Goldman's board meetings private. The Securities and Exchange Commission has filed civil charges against Gupta, but he’s denied doing anything wrong. And Rajaratnam is appealing the verdict.

So what does the guilty verdict mean?

As if you didn’t already know this, if you’re the typical small investor, you are a minnow in a tank of sharks, merely waiting to be eaten by the big fish. You don’t stand a chance when these piranhas are playing by a different set of rules than yours. FULL POST