Bin Laden

[oth]

Everything has to serve his agenda, if it doesn't he'll twist it, and end up looking like a tit.

You are right, and I totally agree.

Every now and then he does stick to only reporting the facts, though.

http://www.infowars.com/top-us-governme ... alse-flag/

It will be interesting to see how this pans out.

Youre kidding?u beleive this nonsense too?
There are many people in govt that beleive in Rapture-which is as dumb as the 72 virgins for martyrdom crap.

"Pieczenik said that Osama Bin Laden died in 2001, “Not because special forces had killed him, but because as a physician I had known that the CIA physicians had treated him and it was on the intelligence roster that he had marfan syndrome,” adding that the US government knew Bin Laden was dead before they invaded Afghanistan."


Hasnt obl made videos since his death in 2001?
The real question here is why do people opt for ignorance in spite of facts that prove them wrong?
This is 1 reason Obama should release obl s photo-though the wackos will say that it is photoshopped just like his bc.Its a never ending game of idiocy with these folk.
I dont know if high unemployment or homeschooling is to blame.

[Alex]

xx123456

[RhoadsRockPhotographer]

I invested in 10,000 shares of Alcoa, today.

I'm predicting a run on hats, so I figure why not get in on the ground floor?

[Trigger]

I have not read this topic so if what I say is just repeating somebody else I am sorry about that.

What has disapointed me with the BL news is that he was subject of a 'kill' type order! I can see that people will be celebrating his ultimate demise and lets be fare if he was responsible for what happened in NY in 2001 those who died at his organisation hands never got a 'life or death' choice either.
But us western nations have prospered and developed on principles of law and order, not always as idealy as we would like, but when a criminal action is carried out we capture the criminal and those who made the crime possible and put them on trial and let the letter of the law be followed.
I read it suggested that this would lead to his place of burial being made into a martyrs shrine which I can imagine might be the case, but many of the same things were said about Saddam but he was taken alive, charged, put on trial, had a verdict passed, appealed the verdict, was excecuted and buried. All of this was done in front of the camera and though I thought telivising his execution was tastless I don't see why or how it was different for Bin Laden.

The first reports I heard was that he was to be taken dead, than I heard that he died because he resisted which is a contradiction, yes he deserved to face full retribution for his wicked crimes against (crimes against humanity), but a trial would have been in line with all our collective national principles. And the irony for him as he faced those who's lives were changed forever would be that he got what his actions denied his own victims.
The outcome would have been the same taken alive or dead, people would have been able to gather, get drunk, wave flags and whoop! but had he been put on trial the American public could have celebrated the capture and then his ultimate demise! two celebrations and brisk trade for flag sellers and bar owners during these hard economic times.

[RhoadsRockPhotographer]

I have not read this topic so if what I say is just repeating somebody else I am sorry about that.

What has disapointed me with the BL news is that he was subject of a 'kill' type order! I can see that people will be celebrating his ultimate demise and lets be fare if he was responsible for what happened in NY in 2001 those who died at his organisation hands never got a 'life or death' choice either.
But us western nations have prospered and developed on principles of law and order, not always as idealy as we would like, but when a criminal action is carried out we capture the criminal and those who made the crime possible and put them on trial and let the letter of the law be followed.
I read it suggested that this would lead to his place of burial being made into a martyrs shrine which I can imagine might be the case, but many of the same things were said about Saddam but he was taken alive, charged, put on trial, had a verdict passed, appealed the verdict, was excecuted and buried. All of this was done in front of the camera and though I thought telivising his execution was tastless I don't see why or how it was different for Bin Laden.

The first reports I heard was that he was to be taken dead, than I heard that he died because he resisted which is a contradiction, yes he deserved to face full retribution for his wicked crimes against (crimes against humanity), but a trial would have been in line with all our collective national principles. And the irony for him as he faced those who's lives were changed forever would be that he got what his actions denied his own victims.
The outcome would have been the same taken alive or dead, people would have been able to gather, get drunk, wave flags and whoop! but had he been put on trial the American public could have celebrated the capture and then his ultimate demise! two celebrations and brisk trade for flag sellers and bar owners during these hard economic times.

Are you for real?

Yikes!

100% incorrect on all counts.

[rice_pudding]

Question the BC?Only a moron would.Especially since his birth was written up in the hawaiin papers 50 yrs ago-can these wackos explain how that happened without a time machine?Boohoo!

I have no stance on Obama's BC, I've not even read/listened to an article on it, though i'm vaguely aware of Trump's allegations and whatnot. Heck i remember some of this talk before he was elected.

Anyway, i just wanted to make a point. Failing owning an original copy of the hawaiin paper in question and carbon dating it (or some other process, i have no idea) you can never be more than 99% sure that the source is correct. Q: Where is this newspaper now? A: online and analogue archives.
Q: Is that hard to fake? A: I won't bore you with an answer.

Most conspiracy theories are self-enveloping; "if the US govt is in on it then they could easily fake a certificate etc. and who would question the authority of the white house in verifying official documentation."

Equally most official rebuttals are self-enveloping; "come on guys this is the white house you think we'd all be fooled by obama and his fake birth certificate if he was italian"

Personally, I believe there is no such thing as the absolute truth. Its all just down to percentages. You can neither prove nor disprove Obama's nationality with 100% certainty. In the face of overwhelming evidence Obama could simply deny the charges. And we would be back into 99% territory. Believe it or not their are 'rulebooks' used by groups like the CIA that dictate misinformation techniques. Techniques used for political, corporate, military or personal gain. You can even buy books published by individuals who use them. Once you know what a turd smells like you can avoid putting your foot in it. And thats one of the only ways to navigate the see of bullshit. Even the best criminal leaves a trace.

Anyway, my point about the paper is this; questioning the source as i did above is the sort of problem a BA history student tackles everyday the morning after recovering from too much snakebite. I don't care where Obama was born, I've no interest in proving anything, so don't label me with that. But if we all take a second look at headline news over the last 10 years, 1 year, whatever, and really interrogate an issue, we realize how much crap we've willingly swallowed. I remember thinking "fucking Russians" during the recent war in Georgia. Then i investigated the story properly and realized how blind i'd been.

Rob

[rice_pudding]

I have not read this topic so if what I say is just repeating somebody else I am sorry about that.

What has disapointed me with the BL news is that he was subject of a 'kill' type order! I can see that people will be celebrating his ultimate demise and lets be fare if he was responsible for what happened in NY in 2001 those who died at his organisation hands never got a 'life or death' choice either.
But us western nations have prospered and developed on principles of law and order, not always as idealy as we would like, but when a criminal action is carried out we capture the criminal and those who made the crime possible and put them on trial and let the letter of the law be followed.
I read it suggested that this would lead to his place of burial being made into a martyrs shrine which I can imagine might be the case, but many of the same things were said about Saddam but he was taken alive, charged, put on trial, had a verdict passed, appealed the verdict, was excecuted and buried. All of this was done in front of the camera and though I thought telivising his execution was tastless I don't see why or how it was different for Bin Laden.

The first reports I heard was that he was to be taken dead, than I heard that he died because he resisted which is a contradiction, yes he deserved to face full retribution for his wicked crimes against (crimes against humanity), but a trial would have been in line with all our collective national principles. And the irony for him as he faced those who's lives were changed forever would be that he got what his actions denied his own victims.
The outcome would have been the same taken alive or dead, people would have been able to gather, get drunk, wave flags and whoop! but had he been put on trial the American public could have celebrated the capture and then his ultimate demise! two celebrations and brisk trade for flag sellers and bar owners during these hard economic times.

Well said Trigger. I echo your sentiment, bad as he was, i find no pleasure in celebrating someones death. The initial American press reported that he died cowering behind his wife, should i celebrate that? If they had got the wrong man the story would read; "Crack military unit kill old guy hiding behind wife". And i shouldn't laugh, but thats funny in a very black way

A trial would have made him face his crimes. Shooting him in the head just made him face the wrong end of a gun which would have been the end result of the former anyway.

Personally i think the US wanted to take him alive, with the laughable amount of contradiction so far i would hazard a guess at a "botched operation" being quite likely.

The US/West seems to have a new 'kill only' policy. Like blowing up Gaddaffi's grandchildren, when we are supposed to be keeping the peace. Sure he's a bad guy in relatively stark terms, but thats not justice. And we wont even admit we're trying to kill him. But heck thats off topic.

Rob

[Cpt Matt Sparrow]

The big difference though between Sadaam and Osamu is that the former was an official leader. Osamu was a proven terrorist who was at large that who was notorious for using underhand techniques to kill. Someone like him was never going to go quietly and could gave had explosives strapped to him. In the situation I think firing at him, unless he was standing there stark naked was the most sensible option.

Matt

[Alex]

xx123456

[Trigger]

The big difference though between Sadaam and Osamu is that the former was an official leader. Osamu was a proven terrorist who was at large that who was notorious for using underhand techniques to kill. Someone like him was never going to go quietly and could gave had explosives strapped to him. In the situation I think firing at him, unless he was standing there stark naked was the most sensible option.

Matt

He was n't a head of state but international law courts are not just the place to try elected or non elected despotic national leaders, the international court sitting in Africa has passed sentence on militia leaders who had thousends of deaths directly atributed to them, as does BL so for, I still can't find a reason to make two bullets to the head more deserving than a judicial trial.

I understand your concerns Matt about hidden expolsives but I think the fact he was confronted in his own home makes that threat unlikely. I am not sure how much you know about the explosive vests that have been used by suicide bombers but (mostly) they are not a garment you can just put on like a waistcoat, they need to be wired up to a detonator by a third person.
For the threat of a bomb vest to have been a reality they would have had to knock on his door ask if he was in there, and he would have had to say I will be out in about 25 minutes!
When we see these martyr videos we see the bomber making his claims, these martyrs follow a ritual (if you like) where the bomber makes a video and has photographs taken and then they fit his explosives and he goes off to carry out his mission, whilst he is away the group print martyr posters.

[Cpt Matt Sparrow]

I still trust there was good reason to kill him as I am sure he could have been interrogated etc

[Trigger]

I still trust there was good reason to kill him as I am sure he could have been interrogated etc

I hope so too Matt, but as he is dead and cant be interrogated under oath and put on trial hope is what we are left with.

[Cpt Matt Sparrow]

I am afraid, I not left impassioned about the possibility of the Americans breaking any rules on this either (my strong gut instinct tells me this is kosha anyway). Maybe there could had been some benefit for us, if he had been kept alive, but while I consider a bit crass to go around 'whooping' that he is dead, I am also more pleased than not that this has happened.

On to the next story now, the world has bigger fish to fry,

Matt

[Trigger]

On to the next story now, the world has bigger fish to fry,

Matt

OK Dad! do you still want me to clean my room?

[Cpt Matt Sparrow]

yes I do, but first I want you to put into back bin bags all your gaylord monthly magazines. They are upsetting your mother and the sooner they get put in the recycling boxes the better