Bin Laden Dead Truthers Mourn - Page 14

little grey rabbit · 6th May 2011, 02:06 AM

How can you be sure that someone rolling out of bed in their PJs is Osama bin Laden anyway?

leftysergeant · 6th May 2011, 03:01 AM

Originally Posted by little grey rabbit

How can you be sure that someone rolling out of bed in their PJs is Osama bin Laden anyway?

His face is pretty well-know and instantly recognizeable world-wide.

He was also considerably taller than most folk.

Sword_Of_Truth · 6th May 2011, 03:12 AM

Tempesta and Cicorp/Truthmakespeace, do you understand Osama Bin Laden was a MILITARY TARGET in a combat zone?

Do you understand that the military objective was to make sure to neutralize the target? Not just to neutralize it but to make sure that it was (as in bring back proof)?

Do you understand that the team leader was likely given orders that if he felt there was enough danger that the target might escape neutralization (possibly due to counter-attack by Al-Qeada or Pakistani military allied with Al-Qeada) that he was to kill the target?

little grey rabbit · 6th May 2011, 03:14 AM

Originally Posted by leftysergeant

His face is pretty well-know and instantly recognizeable world-wide.

He was also considerably taller than most folk.

What if he had just had a shave? Khalid Sheik Mohammed is now unrecognisable from his capture photos.

You might of got Craig Reucassel by mistake.

SatansMaleVoiceChoir · 6th May 2011, 03:24 AM

Soldier here again.

I stand by what I said earlier this week in this thread, unfortunately it would seem actual events do not.

Let me firstly say that I do not doubt OBL is dead; I am not a Truther; I certainly do not mourn OBL, but I am becoming less comfortable with these events as time goes on and details are revealed.

I understand the concept of ‘fog of war’ or Battlefield confusion/chaos as much as any soldier these days does, but despite this I am uncomfortable to the extent at which the account of the events has changed in four days. This was supposedly a precision military operation that was watched via live (?) feed by the President of the USA himself, and it has gone from being portrayed as an intense and chaotic firefight between OBL and his ‘entourage’ (with a human shield thrown in) against a team of Navy SEALs who urged him to give himself up repeatedly, to only one man opening fire (with a woman being killed in the ‘crossfire’) and OBL being shot because ‘it looked like he might have been reaching for a weapon’. That’s big difference which makes me uneasy, and smacks of revisionism.

Speaking as a British soldier with over 3 years of operational experience in Northern Ireland, we are trained not to shoot people who ‘look like they might be going for a weapon’, but as a last resort to prevent loss of life (which can be a broad definition). OBL was clearly going for a weapon, or he wasn’t; ‘looked like he might have been’, just wouldn’t cut it in that situation, as far as I am personally concerned.

Simply going by the latest information released, you can’t even argue that these soldiers would have been justified in opening fire because of the heightened state they would have been in after a prolonged firefight. When I joined the Army, even recruit Musicians underwent what we call ‘Battlefield Inoculation’, whereby live rounds are fired extremely close overhead as you crawl through a barbed-wire course with explosives going off close by; in this instance we’re talking about trained, professional, experienced ‘Special Forces’ personnel; not nervous, trigger-happy recruits.

I very much doubt OBL wanted to be taken alive, and I’d suggest doing so would not be worth the possible gains to the ‘War on Terror’, but the point remains (in my opinion) that it is looking more and more likely that he COULD have been taken alive.

triforcharity · 6th May 2011, 05:38 AM

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

I don't see anyone defending bin laden. I do hear people questioning what our SEALs were ordered to do and why.

That is because you have your head in your posterior.

000063 · 6th May 2011, 05:43 AM

Originally Posted by TruthMakesPeace

We're lucky you are not in Law Enforcement. That is the kind of lying, sneaky thinking and criminal behavior that creates terrorists and endangers innocent Americans. True Americans never stoop so low.

Neither does any True Scotsman, for that matter.

Quote:

We obey the laws while enforcing the laws. The U.S. Marshals always find a way to get their man. The Texas Rangers get their man. And they bring them in alive. They may have to think a little harder, be quicker, and be better trained. But they do it the right way.

Law enforcement != counter-terrorist actions. And the Rangers do kill on occasion.

Quote:

There are SO many ways Bin Laden could have been taken alive. Tear gas.

Does not prevent people firing a gun, potential for gas masks.

Quote:

Noise technology.

Bulky, cumbersome, requires specific conditions.

Quote:

Knock-out gas.

Takes some time to work, unreliable, potential for gas masks, may well kill the people you're trying to capture.

Quote:

Just waiting him out.

Stealth operation in a country that would be dispatching fighters to check it out.

Quote:

There was zero reason to shoot an unarmed man in the head,

It's a war, he was a threat.

Quote:

and an unarmed woman in the legs. AN UNARMED WOMAN!

The same woman who rushed the commandos, and was also a threat.

Quote:

It only makes America look bad to the world.

Speaking as someone who's not an American; boo-freaking-hoo.

Quote:

We are better than that. As leaders, we must hold ourselves to a higher standard of behavior, to show what is truly justice, both at home and abroad.

Somewhere, and eagle is crying.

Quote:

Obama said "justice has been done" - and he's a Harvard Law School graduate. He should know better. Justice is not lynching, execution without a trial.

Shot in combat for being a threat != lynching.

Quote:

Justice is bringing in fugitives alive, to face trial before a judge and jury.

As has been pointed out, he could have been a threat. It is possible for people to arm themselves without being noticeable.

Quote:

So why didn't the SEALS do that when they could? Even an armed troop of Boy Scouts using knock out gas

Which type of gas, exactly? This is the second time you've cited this magical substance, yet you seem to have a greatly exaggerated idea of it's effectiveness.

Quote:

could have simply waited him out, and brought him in alive.

And then gotten captured by Pakistan.

Quote:

The answer seems to be that the White House gave orders to kill, and did not WANT him to ever testify, because he would plead not guilty to 9/11. Then the DoJ would have to provide evidence he had anything to do with planning 9/11.

He had over nine years to protest his innocence, and the free run of just about any paper or tv station in the Middle East. The only time he claimed innocence was shortly after the attacks, just like he did with the 1998 embassy bombings, which he later claimed and was charged with. If he was innocent, he could've surrendered to a neutral country long ago and proved it.

twinstead · 6th May 2011, 05:53 AM

This is one of the worst examples of Monday morning quarterbacking I've ever seen.

SatansMaleVoiceChoir · 6th May 2011, 05:58 AM

Originally Posted by 000063

It's a war, he was a threat.

One question: how could an unarmed, old man, surrounded by Navy SEALs pose 'a threat'? Events suggest that he did not die riddled with bullets, leaping across the room for a weapon, but was shot once, in the head at close range while unarmed. Does that sound like a heated, snap firefight, or an execution?

I'm not bothered he's dead at all, but why all the revisionism? Why all the pretense that this WASN'T an assassination, when it's looking more and more like it was?

000063 · 6th May 2011, 06:06 AM

Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir

One question: how could an unarmed, old man, surrounded by Navy SEALs pose 'a threat'?

Where is it written he was "surrounded"? And just because a middle-aged man looks unarmed doesn't mean he is. It's a reasonable suspicion, under the circumstances.

Quote:

Events suggest that he did not die riddled with bullets, leaping across the room for a weapon, but was shot once, in the head at close range while unarmed. Does that sound like a heated, snap firefight, or an execution?

False binary. If they though he might've been reaching for a weapon, or trying to trigger a suicide vest, they would've shot him. Apparently they did.

Quote:

I'm not bothered he's dead at all, but why all the revisionism? Why all the pretense that this WASN'T an assassination, when it's looking more and more like it was?

Subjective, and there's a lot of debate over this going on right now. IMO, if they wanted to just execute him, they would've just dropped a bomb.

SatansMaleVoiceChoir · 6th May 2011, 06:34 AM

Originally Posted by 000063

Where is it written he was "surrounded"? And just because a middle-aged man looks unarmed doesn't mean he is. It's a reasonable suspicion, under the circumstances.

Bad choice of words; sustitute 'outnumbered' or 'outgunned' as you wish. He had no weapons on him according to recent events, so what was he threatening them with?

Originally Posted by 000063

False binary. If they though he might've been reaching for a weapon, or trying to trigger a suicide vest, they would've shot him. Apparently they did.

Agreed. But it would appear in that split second, that only ONE man felt threatened enough to squeeze off a single aimed shot to the head. Call it an argument from incredulity, but that doesn't sit right in that situation with me.

Originally Posted by 000063

Subjective, and there's a lot of debate over this going on right now. IMO, if they wanted to just execute him, they would've just dropped a bomb.

Dropped a bomb? On a building in a closely built-up area an allied country? Really?

000063 · 6th May 2011, 06:48 AM

Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir

Bad choice of words; sustitute 'outnumbered' or 'outgunned' as you wish. He had no weapons on him according to recent events, so what was he threatening them with?

He wasn't standing still and letting them strip-search. You'd be surprised at how many weapons an apparently unarmed person can have on them.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Quote:

Agreed. But it would appear in that split second, that only ONE man felt threatened enough to squeeze off a single aimed shot to the head. Call it an argument from incredulity, but that doesn't sit right in that situation with me.

How many men were in the room, exactly, and how many of them were dealing with the wife? What "split-second"? And if the target appears to be "neutralized", any more fire would be redundant.

Quote:

Dropped a bomb? On a building in a closely built-up area an allied country? Really?

I said "if". If they wanted to at least try and capture him and intel, they would've put actual boots on the ground.

Which they did.

SatansMaleVoiceChoir · 6th May 2011, 07:06 AM

Originally Posted by 000063

He wasn't standing still and letting them strip-search. You'd be surprised at how many weapons an apparently unarmed person can have on them.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

No, I wouldn't. However, it's a moot question - he had no weapons on him, and going by various reports 'it was thought' he was attempting to pick up an AK47 which was 'found in the room'. Not very clear, other than the fact he had no weapons on his person, and allegedly did not act as though he did.

Originally Posted by 000063

How many men were in the room, exactly, and how many of them were dealing with the wife? What "split-second"? And if the target appears to be "neutralized", any more fire would be redundant.

I don't know. How many men are in a SEAL Team? Anywhere around 4 - 8 depending on the circumstances if British SF SOPs are similar. I'll be generous and suggest we can remove two highly trained Navy SEALS to 'deal with' a wounded woman. That leaves two Navy SEALS; in the split-second (short amount of time) it took for OBL to make a perceived move towards a weapon 'in the room'; only one of them decided this was a threat, but still had enough time and presence of mind to line up a headshot on a moving target. That goes against everything I have been taught, and have seen taught.

This is all redundant anyway if the 'double-tap' reports are true - if they are then it was an assassination.

Originally Posted by 000063

I said "if". If they wanted to at least try and capture him and intel, they would've put actual boots on the ground.

Which they did.

Or if they wanted to cleanly assassinate him with minimum collateral damage. Which they did.

Clayton Moore · 6th May 2011, 07:09 AM

Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir

Bad choice of words; sustitute 'outnumbered' or 'outgunned' as you wish. He had no weapons on him according to recent events, so what was he threatening them with?

Agreed. But it would appear in that split second, that only ONE man felt threatened enough to squeeze off a single aimed shot to the head. Call it an argument from incredulity, but that doesn't sit right in that situation with me.

Dropped a bomb? On a building in a closely built-up area an allied country? Really?

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/may...trike-20110501

Quote:

NATO strike kills Kadafi son, Libyan official says
Killed were Seif al Arab Kadafi, 29, and three of Moammar Kadafi's grandchildren,

bin Laden certainly pushed that and gasoline prices off the front page.

000063 · 6th May 2011, 07:13 AM

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

bin Laden certainly pushed that and gasoline prices off the front page.

What are you implying?

aggle-rithm · 6th May 2011, 07:18 AM

Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir

That’s big difference which makes me uneasy, and smacks of revisionism.

Revisionism is when you replace the real story with one that you want people to believe.

This is a case of releasing the story you want people to believe first, then making a correction after things die down, knowing that most people won't remember the corrections.

aggle-rithm · 6th May 2011, 07:21 AM

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

bin Laden certainly pushed that and gasoline prices off the front page.

If they faked it all as a distraction, they wasted a golden opportunity. It would have been much better to save a faked bin Laden take-down for early November next year, just before the presidential elections. Obama would be a shoe-in.

Oh, I know. They're simultaneously evil geniuses and too stupid to take the obvious path.

twinstead · 6th May 2011, 07:22 AM

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

bin Laden certainly pushed that and gasoline prices off the front page.

Well there can only be ONE main headline, but the news that I read has had gas prices on the front page along with Bin laden the entire time. People can pay attention to more than one thing at a time you know.

TruthMakesPeace · 6th May 2011, 07:28 AM

Originally Posted by The Doc

Intelligence analysts had ASSUMED for a long time (based on reports and historical behavior) that Osama was always in reach of a suicide vest or other explosives.

No, there was never any evidence that Bin Laden was suicidal, or would blow up his nearby wife and kids with such a vest. None was reported, and would have been by now. He had been at the "mansion" for years, with no reason to think he would be attacked that night.

Apparently some authority in Pakistan was secretly harboring him, probably someone who believed he was a patsy for 9/11 and was not temped by the $25 million reward. Only under such protection could Bin Laden let his guard down somewhat.

Bin Laden was in his sleeping garment, and such a vest would have been visible. A trained Navy SEAL, with fast reflexes, with body armor, and backed up by his team, had no reason to fear an unarmed man, much less an unarmed woman, his wife, who was shot in the leg.

Bin Laden was evidently "silenced" for some reason, as Lee Harvey Oswald was, before he could testify. He would want to live and plead innocent to planning 9/11, as all verified (not manufactured) announcements have. Cheney looks pretty relieved in a recent interview, and distorts the word "justice". It was a lynching - being killed by a group without a trial.

However, I do agree that he was a strong suspect for other crimes, and should have gone to jail for life, just for organizing such a terrorist group.

An honest assessment of his records, without manipulation, would prove that Bin Laden did not plan 9/11. Nothing reported so far proves he did.

Predictably, an obviously Obama-serving report claims he was "in the planning stages" or had vague "aspirations" to derail trains on 9/11/2011 and we "caught him in the nick of time"

I'd like to see that in his own hand writing. He was reported as not wanting to use computers or the internet. So we should be skeptical of anything he allegedly typed.

Clayton Moore · 6th May 2011, 07:35 AM

Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir

This is all redundant anyway if the 'double-tap' reports are true - if they are then it was an assassination.

Or if they wanted to cleanly assassinate him with minimum collateral damage. Which they did.

Never heard of 'double-tap.' So I googled it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...JxhF_blog.html

Navy SEALs Team 6: Super-secret, drinkers of snake venom, known for the ‘double tap’
By Elizabeth Flock

Quote:

Team 6, technically named the United States Naval Special Warfare Development Group, consists of the nation’s quietest, most delicate killers, called SEALS because of their discreet work by Sea, Air or Land.

Some Navy SEALs have bragged that they drink snake venom, according to MSNBC. They sometimes punctuate their kills with a kiss on the cheek. They crash through doors and “double tap” their enemy’s face, as they did to Osama bin Laden, to ensure he was dead.

The men of Team 6 undergo agonizing training, with two years of a combination of brain and brutal brawn work. The training is concluded by five days of “Hell Week,” in which they face simulated battle stress through bullets, bombs, and extreme endurance tests. The men can ring a bell to quit at any moment, and many do. (There’s only a 31 percent success rate, according to the Chicago Sun-Times.)

Lizzy Flocked up cause she didn't understand what she was writing about.

Clayton Moore · 6th May 2011, 07:40 AM

Originally Posted by aggle-rithm

If they faked it all as a distraction, they wasted a golden opportunity. It would have been much better to save a faked bin Laden take-down for early November next year, just before the presidential elections. Obama would be a shoe-in.

Oh, I know. They're simultaneously evil geniuses and too stupid to take the obvious path.

Maybe the freezer fritzed up without anybody noticing.

SatansMaleVoiceChoir · 6th May 2011, 07:40 AM

Originally Posted by aggle-rithm

Revisionism is when you replace the real story with one that you want people to believe.

This is a case of releasing the story you want people to believe first, then making a correction after things die down, knowing that most people won't remember the corrections.

Yes, indeed. Poor choice of words on my part - same thing meant; wrong word used!

Clayton Moore · 6th May 2011, 07:43 AM

Originally Posted by 000063

What are you implying?

Nothing. Finish your happy meal.

SatansMaleVoiceChoir · 6th May 2011, 07:47 AM

Originally Posted by TruthMakesPeace

No, there was never any evidence that Bin Laden was suicidal, or would blow up his nearby wife and kids with such a vest. None was reported, and would have been by now. He had been at the "mansion" for years, with no reason to think he would be attacked that night.

I have read much to suggest than OBL would rather die a martyr than be captured, but I generally agree.

Originally Posted by TruthMakesPeace

Apparently some authority in Pakistan was secretly harboring him, probably someone who believed he was a patsy for 9/11 and was not temped by the $25 million reward. Only under such protection could Bin Laden let his guard down somewhat.

Seems reasonable.

Originally Posted by TruthMakesPeace

Bin Laden was in his sleeping garment, and such a vest would have been visible. A trained Navy SEAL, with fast reflexes, and backed up by his team, had no reason to fear an unarmed man, much less an unarmed woman, his wife, who was shot in the leg.

Generally agree.

Originally Posted by TruthMakesPeace

Bin Laden was evidently "silenced" for some reason, as Lee Harvey Oswald was, before he could testify. He would want to live and plead innocent to planning 9/11, as all verified (not manufactured) announcements have. I do agree that he was a strong suspect for other crimes, and should have gone to jail for life, just for organizing such a terrorist group.

An honest assessment of his records, without manipulation, would prove that Bin Laden did not plan 9/11. Unfortunately an obviously Obama-serving report "proves" he was "in the planning stages" to derail trains on 9/11/2011 and we "caught him in the nick of time"

Call me a skeptic.

Do not agree at all. Bin Laden did not plan 9/11 because he simply approved the operation and secured/provided the funding; the planning an execution was KSM and crew.

Sabretooth · 6th May 2011, 07:49 AM

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

Maybe the freezer fritzed up without anybody noticing.

You do realize that even a frozen body shows obvious signs of decomposition?

SatansMaleVoiceChoir · 6th May 2011, 07:57 AM

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

Never heard of 'double-tap.' So I googled it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...JxhF_blog.html

Navy SEALs Team 6: Super-secret, drinkers of snake venom, known for the ‘double tap’
By Elizabeth Flock

Lizzy Flocked up cause she didn't understand what she was writing about.

This woman has obviously fallen for some sort of gung-ho, romanticised Hollywood ideal of what constitutes Special Forces. Saying "Known for the 'double tap'" is as redundant as saying 'Known for being in the Special Forces'. "Known" by who for the 'double tap'? Is she suggesting that Team 6 leave scores of dead bodies in their wake to be found by lesser troops who exclaim "Look, 'double tap' - this can only be the work of Navy SEAL Team 6!"

That paragraph reads like she was drunk while she wrote it.

Myriad · 6th May 2011, 07:58 AM

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

Nothing. Finish your happy meal.

He's too modest. What he was implying was:

- That Bin Laden's death was either scheduled or outright faked (or both) for the specific purpose of distracting Americans from rising gas prices.

- That the effectiveness of this ploy relies on Americans not noticing rising gas prices unless news stories about them are the lead story on the first page (because those big signs at every gas station telling them what the current price is apparently go unnoticed).

- That Americans noticing rising gas prices during this particular week was a special and urgent threat to the powers that be, since otherwise they could have just waited a week as recent commodities market movements make it extremely likely that gas prices will fall during the coming week.

- That Clayton Moore was not willing to explicitly state what he was clearly attempting to imply, because explicitly stated it sounds really stupid.

Respectfully,
Myriad

ElMondoHummus · 6th May 2011, 08:03 AM

Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir

Do not agree at all. Bin Laden did not plan 9/11 because he simply approved the operation and secured/provided the funding; the planning an execution was KSM and crew.

Well, actually, he was a bit more involved than just that. As one example of him getting involved, Mohamed Atta was personally chosen by OBL for the 9/11 missions. You are correct, however, that KSM was the hands-on details planning guy.

000063 · 6th May 2011, 08:12 AM

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

Nothing. Finish your happy meal.

I love how you can't even answer a direct question without being passive-aggressive.

Clayton Moore · 6th May 2011, 08:14 AM

Originally Posted by Myriad

He's too modest. What he was implying was:

- That Bin Laden's death was either scheduled or outright faked (or both) for the specific purpose of distracting Americans from rising gas prices.

- That the effectiveness of this ploy relies on Americans not noticing rising gas prices unless news stories about them are the lead story on the first page (because those big signs at every gas station telling them what the current price is apparently go unnoticed).

- That Americans noticing rising gas prices during this particular week was a special and urgent threat to the powers that be, since otherwise they could have just waited a week as recent commodities market movements make it extremely likely that gas prices will fall during the coming week.

- That Clayton Moore was not willing to explicitly state what he was clearly attempting to imply, because explicitly stated it sounds really stupid.

Respectfully,
Myriad

You forgot the 3 grandchildren who were bombed to death.

alexi_drago · 6th May 2011, 08:18 AM

Some of my thoughts on this and what's been said in this thread, I don't have any doubt that this was a mission taking out Osama, anything else would involve the Pakistani Government/military/intelligence being compliant in making themselves look bad in some way or another. But...

I find the changing story and 'fog of war' a bit odd, did the camera lenses on the helmets fog up or something?

I don't care whether Osama was armed or not but I also find it odd that he would only reach to pick up a nearby gun in the room he was in only after the seals entered when he'd already have heard the helicopters and gunfire.

If Osama had been taken alive what action or how far would his followers go to try to get him released?

I read somewhere in this thread someone asking where they found a lab capable of the DNA analysis open at that time of night or something, does anyone really think they'd wait until they got a sample and then worry about that or as part of the mission they'd already have that in place to test as quickly as possible and that they'd have samples from siblings to compare with on site?

Bombing the compound instead? How could they be sure they got him?

AD.

Clayton Moore · 6th May 2011, 08:22 AM

Originally Posted by Sabretooth

You do realize that even a frozen body shows obvious signs of decomposition?

SCIFI or Discovery channel?

Sabretooth · 6th May 2011, 08:25 AM

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

SCIFI or Discovery channel?

Wow. Just...wow.

Welcome to ignore, troll.

000063 · 6th May 2011, 08:26 AM

Originally Posted by TruthMakesPeace

No, there was never any evidence that Bin Laden was suicidal, or would blow up his nearby wife and kids with such a vest. None was reported, and would have been by now. He had been at the "mansion" for years, with no reason to think he would be attacked that night.

No, there was no evidence that the vest was there, post facto. There was evidence before the operation that he might have so, and the SEALs went in with that in mind.

Quote:

Apparently some authority in Pakistan was secretly harboring him, probably someone who believed he was a patsy for 9/11 and was not temped by the $25 million reward. Only under such protection could Bin Laden let his guard down somewhat.

Because people never refrain from turning someone in out of ideology, right?

Quote:

Bin Laden was in his sleeping garment, and such a vest would have been visible.

Again, you can hide a lot of weapons on a human body.

Quote:

A trained Navy SEAL, with fast reflexes,

Guns aren't as accurate as you seem to think, especially with a moving target.

Quote:

with body armor,

Which is not invincible.

Quote:

and backed up by his team, had no reason to fear an unarmed man, much less an unarmed woman, his wife, who was shot in the leg.

They couldn't know he or said wife were unarmed until they had been neutralized and searched. Why do you keep ignoring that? (000063 asked rhetorically.)

Quote:

Bin Laden was evidently "silenced" for some reason, as Lee Harvey Oswald was, before he could testify.

Yeah, it's not like he had nine years to protest his innocence in more than a token fashion.

[/sarcasm]

Quote:

He would want to live and plead innocent to planning 9/11, as all verified (not manufactured) announcements have.

Source please.

Quote:

Cheney looks pretty relieved in a recent interview, and distorts the word "justice".

Just as you distort all the possible reasons for his belief, such as a dangerous terrorist being dead.

[quote] It was a lynching - being killed by a group without a trial.[/quote]It was war, not law-enforcement. Stop ignoring that.

Quote:

An honest assessment of his records, without manipulation, would prove that Bin Laden did not plan 9/11. Nothing reported so far proves he did.

Poisoning the well.

Quote:

Predictably, an obviously Obama-serving report claims he was "in the planning stages" or had vague "aspirations" to derail trains on 9/11/2011 and we "caught him in the nick of time"

I'd like to see that in his own hand writing.

Unlikely, since the info seems to have been recovered from his computer, and the details are understandably still classified.

Quote:

He was reported as not wanting to use computers or the internet.

No, not wanting to use phones or the Internet. Hence all the portable media they needed to sneakernet stuff around, which is a lot harder to pin down than telecommunications.

000063 · 6th May 2011, 08:30 AM

Originally Posted by alexi_drago

Some of my thoughts on this and what's been said in this thread, I don't have any doubt that this was a mission taking out Osama, anything else would involve the Pakistani Government/military/intelligence being compliant in making themselves look bad in some way or another. But...

Some people suspect Pakistan officials were complicit in hiding him, so they couldn't let them know about the op.

Quote:

I find the changing story and 'fog of war' a bit odd, did the camera lenses on the helmets fog up or something?

It refers to the standard confusion about what's going on found in any military operation in history more complicated than two guys with rocks.

Quote:

I don't care whether Osama was armed or not but I also find it odd that he would only reach to pick up a nearby gun in the room he was in only after the seals entered when he'd already have heard the helicopters and gunfire.

What gun?

Quote:

If Osama had been taken alive what action or how far would his followers go to try to get him released?

Terrorism, same as usual.

Quote:

I read somewhere in this thread someone asking where they found a lab capable of the DNA analysis open at that time of night or something, does anyone really think they'd wait until they got a sample and then worry about that or as part of the mission they'd already have that in place to test as quickly as possible and that they'd have samples from siblings to compare with on site?

Considering they have dedicated labs for purposes just such as this...

Quote:

Bombing the compound instead? How could they be sure they got him?

The Pakistanis might confirm it, and/or Al Qaeda, but it might not be credible. All the more reason for a ground op.

000063 · 6th May 2011, 08:31 AM

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

You forgot the 3 grandchildren who were bombed to death.

Innocents getting hurt as collateral damage in a conflict isn't exactly a political knockdown.

Clayton Moore · 6th May 2011, 08:38 AM

[quote=000063;7156995]No, there was no evidence that the vest was there, post facto. There was evidence before the operation that he might have so, and the SEALs went in with that in mind.

Because people never refrain from turning someone in out of ideology, right?

Again, you can hide a lot of weapons on a human body.

Guns aren't as accurate as you seem to think, especially with a moving target.

Which is not invincible.

They couldn't know he or said wife were unarmed until they had been neutralized and searched. Why do you keep ignoring that? (000063 asked rhetorically.)

Yeah, it's not like he had nine years to protest his innocence in more than a token fashion.

[/sarcasm]

Source please.

Just as you distort all the possible reasons for his belief, such as a dangerous terrorist being dead.

Quote:

It was a lynching - being killed by a group without a trial.[/quote]It was war, not law-enforcement. Stop ignoring that.

Poisoning the well.

Unlikely, since the info seems to have been recovered from his computer, and the details are understandably still classified.

No, not wanting to use phones or the Internet. Hence all the portable media they needed to sneakernet stuff around, which is a lot harder to pin down than telecommunications.

And the point of using a computer without the internet?
Pong? Scrabble? CAD/CAM? Burglar alarm?

000063 · 6th May 2011, 08:57 AM

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

And the point of using a computer without the internet?
Pong? Scrabble? CAD/CAM? Burglar alarm?

1. You're ignoring the entire rest of my post, and focusing on what might be the strongest one of my arguments.
2. Planning terrorist attacks. It is quite possible to simply copy a pirated program onto a CD or flash drive, or to open up Wordpad and start outlining a plan.

Clayton Moore · 6th May 2011, 09:06 AM

Originally Posted by 000063

1. You're ignoring the entire rest of my post, and focusing on what might be the strongest one of my arguments.
2. Planning terrorist attacks. It is quite possible to simply copy a pirated program onto a CD or flash drive, or to open up Wordpad and start outlining a plan.

A pirated program? What does that even mean? Stealing another terrorist's software?

alexi_drago · 6th May 2011, 09:14 AM

Originally Posted by 000063

Some people suspect Pakistan officials were complicit in hiding him, so they couldn't let them know about the op.

Not what I was referring to, Pakistan officials may have been hiding him or they may have just been completely inept.
What I was referring to was the idea of his nine year frozen body being used or other such nonsense, the Pakistani government would have had to be 'in on it' with the US even though it would make Pakistan look very bad.

Quote:

It refers to the standard confusion about what's going on found in any military operation in history more complicated than two guys with rocks.

With cameras on their heads, the guy making the press release and has seen the videos says 'the other guy was hiding behind his wife and throwing rocks, well actually he wasn't hiding behind his wife, and, well he wasn't throwing rocks either.'

Quote:

What gun?

The AK47 and the handgun that supposedly he may have been reaching for, unless the story has changed yet again.

Quote:

Terrorism, same as usual.

So, one reason it may have been more dangerous to take him alive.

Quote:

Considering they have dedicated labs for purposes just such as this...

So I don't see why the speed at which the DNA comparisons were done is really much of an issue.

Quote:

The Pakistanis might confirm it, and/or Al Qaeda, but it might not be credible. All the more reason for a ground op.

Exactly, so I don't see the reason for suggesting they should've just bombed the compound.

AD

6th May 2011, 03:01 AM	#522
leftysergeant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Spanaway WA Posts: 18,613	Originally Posted by little grey rabbit How can you be sure that someone rolling out of bed in their PJs is Osama bin Laden anyway? His face is pretty well-know and instantly recognizeable world-wide. He was also considerably taller than most folk.
	__________________ No civilization ever collapsed because the poor had too much to eat.

6th May 2011, 03:24 AM	#525
SatansMaleVoiceChoir Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 1,300	Soldier here again. I stand by what I said earlier this week in this thread, unfortunately it would seem actual events do not. Let me firstly say that I do not doubt OBL is dead; I am not a Truther; I certainly do not mourn OBL, but I am becoming less comfortable with these events as time goes on and details are revealed. I understand the concept of ‘fog of war’ or Battlefield confusion/chaos as much as any soldier these days does, but despite this I am uncomfortable to the extent at which the account of the events has changed in four days. This was supposedly a precision military operation that was watched via live (?) feed by the President of the USA himself, and it has gone from being portrayed as an intense and chaotic firefight between OBL and his ‘entourage’ (with a human shield thrown in) against a team of Navy SEALs who urged him to give himself up repeatedly, to only one man opening fire (with a woman being killed in the ‘crossfire’) and OBL being shot because ‘it looked like he might have been reaching for a weapon’. That’s big difference which makes me uneasy, and smacks of revisionism. Speaking as a British soldier with over 3 years of operational experience in Northern Ireland, we are trained not to shoot people who ‘look like they might be going for a weapon’, but as a last resort to prevent loss of life (which can be a broad definition). OBL was clearly going for a weapon, or he wasn’t; ‘looked like he might have been’, just wouldn’t cut it in that situation, as far as I am personally concerned. Simply going by the latest information released, you can’t even argue that these soldiers would have been justified in opening fire because of the heightened state they would have been in after a prolonged firefight. When I joined the Army, even recruit Musicians underwent what we call ‘Battlefield Inoculation’, whereby live rounds are fired extremely close overhead as you crawl through a barbed-wire course with explosives going off close by; in this instance we’re talking about trained, professional, experienced ‘Special Forces’ personnel; not nervous, trigger-happy recruits. I very much doubt OBL wanted to be taken alive, and I’d suggest doing so would not be worth the possible gains to the ‘War on Terror’, but the point remains (in my opinion) that it is looking more and more likely that he COULD have been taken alive.
	__________________ The aim of argument, or of discussion, should not be victory, but progress. - Joseph Joubert Do not believe hastily. - Ovid There is no worse lie than a truth misunderstood by those who hear it. - William James

6th May 2011, 05:38 AM	#526
triforcharity Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: The South! Posts: 12,095	Originally Posted by Clayton Moore I don't see anyone defending bin laden. I do hear people questioning what our SEALs were ordered to do and why. That is because you have your head in your posterior.
	__________________ "The horse has been led to the water, the horse is in fact standing up to its knees in the water, but the horse is telling you in a loud voice that there's no water to be had....he's still so very thirsty!" ~alienentity

6th May 2011, 05:43 AM	#527
000063 Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Not America. Posts: 4,734	Originally Posted by TruthMakesPeace We're lucky you are not in Law Enforcement. That is the kind of lying, sneaky thinking and criminal behavior that creates terrorists and endangers innocent Americans. True Americans never stoop so low. Neither does any True Scotsman, for that matter. Quote: We obey the laws while enforcing the laws. The U.S. Marshals always find a way to get their man. The Texas Rangers get their man. And they bring them in alive. They may have to think a little harder, be quicker, and be better trained. But they do it the right way. Law enforcement != counter-terrorist actions. And the Rangers do kill on occasion. Quote: There are SO many ways Bin Laden could have been taken alive. Tear gas. Does not prevent people firing a gun, potential for gas masks. Quote: Noise technology. Bulky, cumbersome, requires specific conditions. Quote: Knock-out gas. Takes some time to work, unreliable, potential for gas masks, may well kill the people you're trying to capture. Quote: Just waiting him out. Stealth operation in a country that would be dispatching fighters to check it out. Quote: There was zero reason to shoot an unarmed man in the head, It's a war, he was a threat. Quote: and an unarmed woman in the legs. AN UNARMED WOMAN! The same woman who rushed the commandos, and was also a threat. Quote: It only makes America look bad to the world. Speaking as someone who's not an American; boo-freaking-hoo. Quote: We are better than that. As leaders, we must hold ourselves to a higher standard of behavior, to show what is truly justice, both at home and abroad. Somewhere, and eagle is crying. Quote: Obama said "justice has been done" - and he's a Harvard Law School graduate. He should know better. Justice is not lynching, execution without a trial. Shot in combat for being a threat != lynching. Quote: Justice is bringing in fugitives alive, to face trial before a judge and jury. As has been pointed out, he could have been a threat. It is possible for people to arm themselves without being noticeable. Quote: So why didn't the SEALS do that when they could? Even an armed troop of Boy Scouts using knock out gas Which type of gas, exactly? This is the second time you've cited this magical substance, yet you seem to have a greatly exaggerated idea of it's effectiveness. Quote: could have simply waited him out, and brought him in alive. And then gotten captured by Pakistan. Quote: The answer seems to be that the White House gave orders to kill, and did not WANT him to ever testify, because he would plead not guilty to 9/11. Then the DoJ would have to provide evidence he had anything to do with planning 9/11. He had over nine years to protest his innocence, and the free run of just about any paper or tv station in the Middle East. The only time he claimed innocence was shortly after the attacks, just like he did with the 1998 embassy bombings, which he later claimed and was charged with. If he was innocent, he could've surrendered to a neutral country long ago and proved it.
	Last edited by 000063; 6th May 2011 at 06:09 AM.

6th May 2011, 05:53 AM	#528
twinstead Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Big corner office in NWO Towers Posts: 11,572	This is one of the worst examples of Monday morning quarterbacking I've ever seen.
	__________________ You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison

6th May 2011, 02:06 AM	#521
little grey rabbit Banned Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 3,167	How can you be sure that someone rolling out of bed in their PJs is Osama bin Laden anyway?

6th May 2011, 03:12 AM	#523
Sword_Of_Truth Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 11,497	Tempesta and Cicorp/Truthmakespeace, do you understand Osama Bin Laden was a MILITARY TARGET in a combat zone? Do you understand that the military objective was to make sure to neutralize the target? Not just to neutralize it but to make sure that it was (as in bring back proof)? Do you understand that the team leader was likely given orders that if he felt there was enough danger that the target might escape neutralization (possibly due to counter-attack by Al-Qeada or Pakistani military allied with Al-Qeada) that he was to kill the target?

6th May 2011, 03:14 AM	#524
little grey rabbit Banned Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 3,167	Originally Posted by leftysergeant His face is pretty well-know and instantly recognizeable world-wide. He was also considerably taller than most folk. What if he had just had a shave? Khalid Sheik Mohammed is now unrecognisable from his capture photos. You might of got Craig Reucassel by mistake.

6th May 2011, 05:58 AM	#529
SatansMaleVoiceChoir Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 1,300	Originally Posted by 000063 It's a war, he was a threat. One question: how could an unarmed, old man, surrounded by Navy SEALs pose 'a threat'? Events suggest that he did not die riddled with bullets, leaping across the room for a weapon, but was shot once, in the head at close range while unarmed. Does that sound like a heated, snap firefight, or an execution? I'm not bothered he's dead at all, but why all the revisionism? Why all the pretense that this WASN'T an assassination, when it's looking more and more like it was?
	__________________ The aim of argument, or of discussion, should not be victory, but progress. - Joseph Joubert Do not believe hastily. - Ovid There is no worse lie than a truth misunderstood by those who hear it. - William James

6th May 2011, 06:06 AM	#530
000063 Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Not America. Posts: 4,734	Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir One question: how could an unarmed, old man, surrounded by Navy SEALs pose 'a threat'? Where is it written he was "surrounded"? And just because a middle-aged man looks unarmed doesn't mean he is. It's a reasonable suspicion, under the circumstances. Quote: Events suggest that he did not die riddled with bullets, leaping across the room for a weapon, but was shot once, in the head at close range while unarmed. Does that sound like a heated, snap firefight, or an execution? False binary. If they though he might've been reaching for a weapon, or trying to trigger a suicide vest, they would've shot him. Apparently they did. Quote: I'm not bothered he's dead at all, but why all the revisionism? Why all the pretense that this WASN'T an assassination, when it's looking more and more like it was? Subjective, and there's a lot of debate over this going on right now. IMO, if they wanted to just execute him, they would've just dropped a bomb.
	Last edited by 000063; 6th May 2011 at 06:08 AM.

6th May 2011, 06:34 AM	#531
SatansMaleVoiceChoir Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 1,300	Originally Posted by 000063 Where is it written he was "surrounded"? And just because a middle-aged man looks unarmed doesn't mean he is. It's a reasonable suspicion, under the circumstances. Bad choice of words; sustitute 'outnumbered' or 'outgunned' as you wish. He had no weapons on him according to recent events, so what was he threatening them with? Originally Posted by 000063 False binary. If they though he might've been reaching for a weapon, or trying to trigger a suicide vest, they would've shot him. Apparently they did. Agreed. But it would appear in that split second, that only ONE man felt threatened enough to squeeze off a single aimed shot to the head. Call it an argument from incredulity, but that doesn't sit right in that situation with me. Originally Posted by 000063 Subjective, and there's a lot of debate over this going on right now. IMO, if they wanted to just execute him, they would've just dropped a bomb. Dropped a bomb? On a building in a closely built-up area an allied country? Really?
	__________________ The aim of argument, or of discussion, should not be victory, but progress. - Joseph Joubert Do not believe hastily. - Ovid There is no worse lie than a truth misunderstood by those who hear it. - William James

6th May 2011, 07:09 AM	#534
Clayton Moore Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 6,167	Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir Bad choice of words; sustitute 'outnumbered' or 'outgunned' as you wish. He had no weapons on him according to recent events, so what was he threatening them with? Agreed. But it would appear in that split second, that only ONE man felt threatened enough to squeeze off a single aimed shot to the head. Call it an argument from incredulity, but that doesn't sit right in that situation with me. Dropped a bomb? On a building in a closely built-up area an allied country? Really? http://articles.latimes.com/2011/may...trike-20110501 Quote: NATO strike kills Kadafi son, Libyan official says Killed were Seif al Arab Kadafi, 29, and three of Moammar Kadafi's grandchildren, bin Laden certainly pushed that and gasoline prices off the front page.
	Last edited by Clayton Moore; 6th May 2011 at 08:29 AM. Reason: added link

6th May 2011, 07:13 AM	#535
000063 Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Not America. Posts: 4,734	Originally Posted by Clayton Moore bin Laden certainly pushed that and gasoline prices off the front page. What are you implying?

6th May 2011, 07:18 AM	#536
aggle-rithm Ardent Formulist Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 14,149	Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir That’s big difference which makes me uneasy, and smacks of revisionism. Revisionism is when you replace the real story with one that you want people to believe. This is a case of releasing the story you want people to believe first, then making a correction after things die down, knowing that most people won't remember the corrections.
	__________________ To understand recursion, you must first understand recursion. Woo's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be adequately explained by aliens.

6th May 2011, 07:21 AM	#537
aggle-rithm Ardent Formulist Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 14,149	Originally Posted by Clayton Moore bin Laden certainly pushed that and gasoline prices off the front page. If they faked it all as a distraction, they wasted a golden opportunity. It would have been much better to save a faked bin Laden take-down for early November next year, just before the presidential elections. Obama would be a shoe-in. Oh, I know. They're simultaneously evil geniuses and too stupid to take the obvious path.
	__________________ To understand recursion, you must first understand recursion. Woo's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be adequately explained by aliens.

6th May 2011, 07:22 AM	#538
twinstead Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Big corner office in NWO Towers Posts: 11,572	Originally Posted by Clayton Moore bin Laden certainly pushed that and gasoline prices off the front page. Well there can only be ONE main headline, but the news that I read has had gas prices on the front page along with Bin laden the entire time. People can pay attention to more than one thing at a time you know.
	__________________ You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison Last edited by twinstead; 6th May 2011 at 07:23 AM.

6th May 2011, 07:28 AM	#539
TruthMakesPeace Banned Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Washington DC Posts: 291	Bin Laden, killed before he could testify, like Lee H. Oswald Originally Posted by The Doc Intelligence analysts had ASSUMED for a long time (based on reports and historical behavior) that Osama was always in reach of a suicide vest or other explosives. No, there was never any evidence that Bin Laden was suicidal, or would blow up his nearby wife and kids with such a vest. None was reported, and would have been by now. He had been at the "mansion" for years, with no reason to think he would be attacked that night. Apparently some authority in Pakistan was secretly harboring him, probably someone who believed he was a patsy for 9/11 and was not temped by the $25 million reward. Only under such protection could Bin Laden let his guard down somewhat. Bin Laden was in his sleeping garment, and such a vest would have been visible. A trained Navy SEAL, with fast reflexes, with body armor, and backed up by his team, had no reason to fear an unarmed man, much less an unarmed woman, his wife, who was shot in the leg. Bin Laden was evidently "silenced" for some reason, as Lee Harvey Oswald was, before he could testify. He would want to live and plead innocent to planning 9/11, as all verified (not manufactured) announcements have. Cheney looks pretty relieved in a recent interview, and distorts the word "justice". It was a lynching - being killed by a group without a trial. However, I do agree that he was a strong suspect for other crimes, and should have gone to jail for life, just for organizing such a terrorist group. An honest assessment of his records, without manipulation, would prove that Bin Laden did not plan 9/11. Nothing reported so far proves he did. Predictably, an obviously Obama-serving report claims he was "in the planning stages" or had vague "aspirations" to derail trains on 9/11/2011 and we "caught him in the nick of time" I'd like to see that in his own hand writing. He was reported as not wanting to use computers or the internet. So we should be skeptical of anything he allegedly typed.
	Last edited by TruthMakesPeace; 6th May 2011 at 07:56 AM.

6th May 2011, 07:35 AM	#540
Clayton Moore Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 6,167	Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir This is all redundant anyway if the 'double-tap' reports are true - if they are then it was an assassination. Or if they wanted to cleanly assassinate him with minimum collateral damage. Which they did. Never heard of 'double-tap.' So I googled it. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...JxhF_blog.html Navy SEALs Team 6: Super-secret, drinkers of snake venom, known for the ‘double tap’ By Elizabeth Flock Quote: Team 6, technically named the United States Naval Special Warfare Development Group, consists of the nation’s quietest, most delicate killers, called SEALS because of their discreet work by Sea, Air or Land. Some Navy SEALs have bragged that they drink snake venom, according to MSNBC. They sometimes punctuate their kills with a kiss on the cheek. They crash through doors and “double tap” their enemy’s face, as they did to Osama bin Laden, to ensure he was dead. The men of Team 6 undergo agonizing training, with two years of a combination of brain and brutal brawn work. The training is concluded by five days of “Hell Week,” in which they face simulated battle stress through bullets, bombs, and extreme endurance tests. The men can ring a bell to quit at any moment, and many do. (There’s only a 31 percent success rate, according to the Chicago Sun-Times.) Lizzy Flocked up cause she didn't understand what she was writing about.

6th May 2011, 07:40 AM	#541
Clayton Moore Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 6,167	Originally Posted by aggle-rithm If they faked it all as a distraction, they wasted a golden opportunity. It would have been much better to save a faked bin Laden take-down for early November next year, just before the presidential elections. Obama would be a shoe-in. Oh, I know. They're simultaneously evil geniuses and too stupid to take the obvious path. Maybe the freezer fritzed up without anybody noticing.

6th May 2011, 07:40 AM	#542
SatansMaleVoiceChoir Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 1,300	Originally Posted by aggle-rithm Revisionism is when you replace the real story with one that you want people to believe. This is a case of releasing the story you want people to believe first, then making a correction after things die down, knowing that most people won't remember the corrections. Yes, indeed. Poor choice of words on my part - same thing meant; wrong word used!
	__________________ The aim of argument, or of discussion, should not be victory, but progress. - Joseph Joubert Do not believe hastily. - Ovid There is no worse lie than a truth misunderstood by those who hear it. - William James

6th May 2011, 07:43 AM	#543
Clayton Moore Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 6,167	Originally Posted by 000063 What are you implying? Nothing. Finish your happy meal.

6th May 2011, 07:47 AM	#544
SatansMaleVoiceChoir Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 1,300	Originally Posted by TruthMakesPeace No, there was never any evidence that Bin Laden was suicidal, or would blow up his nearby wife and kids with such a vest. None was reported, and would have been by now. He had been at the "mansion" for years, with no reason to think he would be attacked that night. I have read much to suggest than OBL would rather die a martyr than be captured, but I generally agree. Originally Posted by TruthMakesPeace Apparently some authority in Pakistan was secretly harboring him, probably someone who believed he was a patsy for 9/11 and was not temped by the $25 million reward. Only under such protection could Bin Laden let his guard down somewhat. Seems reasonable. Originally Posted by TruthMakesPeace Bin Laden was in his sleeping garment, and such a vest would have been visible. A trained Navy SEAL, with fast reflexes, and backed up by his team, had no reason to fear an unarmed man, much less an unarmed woman, his wife, who was shot in the leg. Generally agree. Originally Posted by TruthMakesPeace Bin Laden was evidently "silenced" for some reason, as Lee Harvey Oswald was, before he could testify. He would want to live and plead innocent to planning 9/11, as all verified (not manufactured) announcements have. I do agree that he was a strong suspect for other crimes, and should have gone to jail for life, just for organizing such a terrorist group. An honest assessment of his records, without manipulation, would prove that Bin Laden did not plan 9/11. Unfortunately an obviously Obama-serving report "proves" he was "in the planning stages" to derail trains on 9/11/2011 and we "caught him in the nick of time" Call me a skeptic. Do not agree at all. Bin Laden did not plan 9/11 because he simply approved the operation and secured/provided the funding; the planning an execution was KSM and crew.
	__________________ The aim of argument, or of discussion, should not be victory, but progress. - Joseph Joubert Do not believe hastily. - Ovid There is no worse lie than a truth misunderstood by those who hear it. - William James

6th May 2011, 07:49 AM	#545
Sabretooth No Ordinary Rabbit Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Wyoming, NY Posts: 6,149	Originally Posted by Clayton Moore Maybe the freezer fritzed up without anybody noticing. You do realize that even a frozen body shows obvious signs of decomposition?
	__________________ -------------------------------------- Stop asking me about that stupid fruity cereal...that's the OTHER rabbit!

6th May 2011, 07:57 AM	#546
SatansMaleVoiceChoir Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 1,300	Originally Posted by Clayton Moore Never heard of 'double-tap.' So I googled it. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...JxhF_blog.html Navy SEALs Team 6: Super-secret, drinkers of snake venom, known for the ‘double tap’ By Elizabeth Flock Lizzy Flocked up cause she didn't understand what she was writing about. This woman has obviously fallen for some sort of gung-ho, romanticised Hollywood ideal of what constitutes Special Forces. Saying "Known for the 'double tap'" is as redundant as saying 'Known for being in the Special Forces'. "Known" by who for the 'double tap'? Is she suggesting that Team 6 leave scores of dead bodies in their wake to be found by lesser troops who exclaim "Look, 'double tap' - this can only be the work of Navy SEAL Team 6!" That paragraph reads like she was drunk while she wrote it.
	__________________ The aim of argument, or of discussion, should not be victory, but progress. - Joseph Joubert Do not believe hastily. - Ovid There is no worse lie than a truth misunderstood by those who hear it. - William James

6th May 2011, 07:58 AM	#547
Myriad Hyperthetical Moderator Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 8,195	Originally Posted by Clayton Moore Nothing. Finish your happy meal. He's too modest. What he was implying was: - That Bin Laden's death was either scheduled or outright faked (or both) for the specific purpose of distracting Americans from rising gas prices. - That the effectiveness of this ploy relies on Americans not noticing rising gas prices unless news stories about them are the lead story on the first page (because those big signs at every gas station telling them what the current price is apparently go unnoticed). - That Americans noticing rising gas prices during this particular week was a special and urgent threat to the powers that be, since otherwise they could have just waited a week as recent commodities market movements make it extremely likely that gas prices will fall during the coming week. - That Clayton Moore was not willing to explicitly state what he was clearly attempting to imply, because explicitly stated it sounds really stupid. Respectfully, Myriad
	__________________ The cosmos is a vast Loom, with time the warp and space the weft. We are all fruit of the Loom, unaware.

6th May 2011, 08:03 AM	#548
ElMondoHummus 0.25 short of being half-witted Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Somewhere north of the South Pole Posts: 11,938	Originally Posted by SatansMaleVoiceChoir Do not agree at all. Bin Laden did not plan 9/11 because he simply approved the operation and secured/provided the funding; the planning an execution was KSM and crew. Well, actually, he was a bit more involved than just that. As one example of him getting involved, Mohamed Atta was personally chosen by OBL for the 9/11 missions. You are correct, however, that KSM was the hands-on details planning guy.
	__________________ must take this very carefully....booze is wise men's drink..... -pillory "... I'm quite willing to have everyone use my rejection of the 9/11 conspiracy theory as a basis for assessing my intelligence, judgment, and trustworthiness" -Prof. Ann Althouse Last edited by ElMondoHummus; 6th May 2011 at 08:05 AM. Reason: Hit post too early; rewrote a couple of things over again.

6th May 2011, 08:12 AM	#549
000063 Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Not America. Posts: 4,734	Originally Posted by Clayton Moore Nothing. Finish your happy meal. I love how you can't even answer a direct question without being passive-aggressive.

6th May 2011, 08:14 AM	#550
Clayton Moore Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 6,167	Originally Posted by Myriad He's too modest. What he was implying was: - That Bin Laden's death was either scheduled or outright faked (or both) for the specific purpose of distracting Americans from rising gas prices. - That the effectiveness of this ploy relies on Americans not noticing rising gas prices unless news stories about them are the lead story on the first page (because those big signs at every gas station telling them what the current price is apparently go unnoticed). - That Americans noticing rising gas prices during this particular week was a special and urgent threat to the powers that be, since otherwise they could have just waited a week as recent commodities market movements make it extremely likely that gas prices will fall during the coming week. - That Clayton Moore was not willing to explicitly state what he was clearly attempting to imply, because explicitly stated it sounds really stupid. Respectfully, Myriad You forgot the 3 grandchildren who were bombed to death.

6th May 2011, 08:18 AM	#551
alexi_drago Muse Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 676	Some of my thoughts on this and what's been said in this thread, I don't have any doubt that this was a mission taking out Osama, anything else would involve the Pakistani Government/military/intelligence being compliant in making themselves look bad in some way or another. But... I find the changing story and 'fog of war' a bit odd, did the camera lenses on the helmets fog up or something? I don't care whether Osama was armed or not but I also find it odd that he would only reach to pick up a nearby gun in the room he was in only after the seals entered when he'd already have heard the helicopters and gunfire. If Osama had been taken alive what action or how far would his followers go to try to get him released? I read somewhere in this thread someone asking where they found a lab capable of the DNA analysis open at that time of night or something, does anyone really think they'd wait until they got a sample and then worry about that or as part of the mission they'd already have that in place to test as quickly as possible and that they'd have samples from siblings to compare with on site? Bombing the compound instead? How could they be sure they got him? AD.
alexi_drago Muse Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 676	__________________ Thank you for flying Delta Business Express. We hope you enjoyed giving us the business as much as we enjoyed taking you for a ride. Remember, nobody loves you, or your money, more than Delta.

6th May 2011, 08:22 AM	#552
Clayton Moore Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 6,167	Originally Posted by Sabretooth You do realize that even a frozen body shows obvious signs of decomposition? SCIFI or Discovery channel?

6th May 2011, 08:25 AM	#553
Sabretooth No Ordinary Rabbit Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Wyoming, NY Posts: 6,149	Originally Posted by Clayton Moore SCIFI or Discovery channel? Wow. Just...wow. Welcome to ignore, troll.
	__________________ -------------------------------------- Stop asking me about that stupid fruity cereal...that's the OTHER rabbit!

6th May 2011, 08:26 AM	#554
000063 Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Not America. Posts: 4,734	Originally Posted by TruthMakesPeace No, there was never any evidence that Bin Laden was suicidal, or would blow up his nearby wife and kids with such a vest. None was reported, and would have been by now. He had been at the "mansion" for years, with no reason to think he would be attacked that night. No, there was no evidence that the vest was there, post facto. There was evidence before the operation that he might have so, and the SEALs went in with that in mind. Quote: Apparently some authority in Pakistan was secretly harboring him, probably someone who believed he was a patsy for 9/11 and was not temped by the $25 million reward. Only under such protection could Bin Laden let his guard down somewhat. Because people never refrain from turning someone in out of ideology, right? Quote: Bin Laden was in his sleeping garment, and such a vest would have been visible. Again, you can hide a lot of weapons on a human body. Quote: A trained Navy SEAL, with fast reflexes, Guns aren't as accurate as you seem to think, especially with a moving target. Quote: with body armor, Which is not invincible. Quote: and backed up by his team, had no reason to fear an unarmed man, much less an unarmed woman, his wife, who was shot in the leg. They couldn't know he or said wife were unarmed until they had been neutralized and searched. Why do you keep ignoring that? (000063 asked rhetorically.) Quote: Bin Laden was evidently "silenced" for some reason, as Lee Harvey Oswald was, before he could testify. Yeah, it's not like he had nine years to protest his innocence in more than a token fashion. [/sarcasm] Quote: He would want to live and plead innocent to planning 9/11, as all verified (not manufactured) announcements have. Source please. Quote: Cheney looks pretty relieved in a recent interview, and distorts the word "justice". Just as you distort all the possible reasons for his belief, such as a dangerous terrorist being dead. [quote] It was a lynching - being killed by a group without a trial.[/quote]It was war, not law-enforcement. Stop ignoring that. Quote: An honest assessment of his records, without manipulation, would prove that Bin Laden did not plan 9/11. Nothing reported so far proves he did. Poisoning the well. Quote: Predictably, an obviously Obama-serving report claims he was "in the planning stages" or had vague "aspirations" to derail trains on 9/11/2011 and we "caught him in the nick of time" I'd like to see that in his own hand writing. Unlikely, since the info seems to have been recovered from his computer, and the details are understandably still classified. Quote: He was reported as not wanting to use computers or the internet. No, not wanting to use phones or the Internet. Hence all the portable media they needed to sneakernet stuff around, which is a lot harder to pin down than telecommunications.

6th May 2011, 08:30 AM	#555
000063 Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Not America. Posts: 4,734	Originally Posted by alexi_drago Some of my thoughts on this and what's been said in this thread, I don't have any doubt that this was a mission taking out Osama, anything else would involve the Pakistani Government/military/intelligence being compliant in making themselves look bad in some way or another. But... Some people suspect Pakistan officials were complicit in hiding him, so they couldn't let them know about the op. Quote: I find the changing story and 'fog of war' a bit odd, did the camera lenses on the helmets fog up or something? It refers to the standard confusion about what's going on found in any military operation in history more complicated than two guys with rocks. Quote: I don't care whether Osama was armed or not but I also find it odd that he would only reach to pick up a nearby gun in the room he was in only after the seals entered when he'd already have heard the helicopters and gunfire. What gun? Quote: If Osama had been taken alive what action or how far would his followers go to try to get him released? Terrorism, same as usual. Quote: I read somewhere in this thread someone asking where they found a lab capable of the DNA analysis open at that time of night or something, does anyone really think they'd wait until they got a sample and then worry about that or as part of the mission they'd already have that in place to test as quickly as possible and that they'd have samples from siblings to compare with on site? Considering they have dedicated labs for purposes just such as this... Quote: Bombing the compound instead? How could they be sure they got him? The Pakistanis might confirm it, and/or Al Qaeda, but it might not be credible. All the more reason for a ground op.

6th May 2011, 08:31 AM	#556
000063 Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Not America. Posts: 4,734	Originally Posted by Clayton Moore You forgot the 3 grandchildren who were bombed to death. Innocents getting hurt as collateral damage in a conflict isn't exactly a political knockdown.

6th May 2011, 08:38 AM	#557
Clayton Moore Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 6,167	[quote=000063;7156995]No, there was no evidence that the vest was there, post facto. There was evidence before the operation that he might have so, and the SEALs went in with that in mind. Because people never refrain from turning someone in out of ideology, right? Again, you can hide a lot of weapons on a human body. Guns aren't as accurate as you seem to think, especially with a moving target. Which is not invincible. They couldn't know he or said wife were unarmed until they had been neutralized and searched. Why do you keep ignoring that? (000063 asked rhetorically.) Yeah, it's not like he had nine years to protest his innocence in more than a token fashion. [/sarcasm] Source please. Just as you distort all the possible reasons for his belief, such as a dangerous terrorist being dead. Quote: It was a lynching - being killed by a group without a trial.[/quote]It was war, not law-enforcement. Stop ignoring that. Poisoning the well. Unlikely, since the info seems to have been recovered from his computer, and the details are understandably still classified. No, not wanting to use phones or the Internet. Hence all the portable media they needed to sneakernet stuff around, which is a lot harder to pin down than telecommunications. And the point of using a computer without the internet? Pong? Scrabble? CAD/CAM? Burglar alarm?