Osama Bin Laden is dead

[GaijinPunch]

Why watch TV when you can get a 1st hand on it here? With GP, Skykid and Austere at the helm no rock is left untouched.

That was the point. I was here, and all the bullshit coming from every news station from across the pond(s) was stress inducing, to say the least. Family and friends from all over emailing asking me if I had holes yet. People questioning why I was staying so long, etc. etc. The food shortage didn't help.

[austere]

Why watch TV when you can get a 1st hand on it here?

[dcharlie]

CONCLUSIVE PROOF !!!!!

Skykid quoting you in 5.... 4.... 3....

"oh i don't really know... i didn't check..."

<same image from wife saying "F-me, Americans shot and killed me husband!"

Skykid : i dunno guys, i need to see the body and see the bullet holes before i am convinced. *fingerwag* *shaking head*

[austere]

I don't even understand what you guys are ragging him on now. He quoted some opinion piece from a bunch of guys you don't like. Even dcharlie linked the the video interview in question:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lCBVPLVuwCc (highlight at 3:30 when the reporter pushes him away and chucks in a conclusion you can't draw from the eyewitness lol)

And here's another one from more residents from the BBC,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1JWpgAWKEU

Sure the first part of what he quoted was their own speculation but the facts remain the same whoever says it (as shown in the video above). If a crackpot starts screaming Pythagoras' theorem at the top of his lungs, does this make it invalid or crazy to use?

The lack of logical reasoning here can be pretty frustrating. I mean John Birch society seems pretty bad/loony but I bet you all watch and quote CNN like it's the gospel, whereas people with a long enough memory know what a joke it was:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTWY14eyMFg

(Apparently this guy works for foxnews now, lol)

It's all about perspective and this mocking that is going on reeks of hypocrisy if I may say so. No doubt whiteknighting claims are incoming but go ahead, I don't give a damn, I'm just calling them like I see them.

[dcharlie]

I don't even understand what you guys are ragging him on now. He quoted some opinion piece from a bunch of guys you don't like. Even dcharlie linked the the video interview in question:

huh? i'd never heard of the source before and i watched it entirely on it's own merit. There is no concrete evidence , it's an opinion piece effectively. I failed to see why the interview was given any weight and given this demand for questioning of everything i'd have thought you'd agree with this entirely as the questions are self evident.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lCBVPLVuwCc (highlight at 3:30 when the reporter pushes him away and chucks in a conclusion you can't draw from the eyewitness lol)

it doesn't particularly matter what the conclusion was or what his reason was for pushing the guy aside (Too close to the truth? Obviously didn't have anything to actually say? Who knows) -

And here's another one from more residents from the BBC,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1JWpgAWKEU

denial - it can't be him! It's made by "advance technology" - i agree that the level of shock must be incredible but again we go back to the point that people are shocked that the most wanted person in the world was -potentially- hidden in their local area.

Sure the first part of what he quoted was their own speculation but the facts remain the same whoever says it (as shown in the video above). If a crackpot starts screaming Pythagoras' theorem at the top of his lungs, does this make it invalid or crazy to use?

Come now, let's cut the projecting here . NO one is screaming anything on the level of what you are suggesting.

The lack of logical reasoning here can be pretty frustrating

It goes both ways - the double standards on the media are baffling.

[austere]

what his reason was for pushing the guy aside

Just pointing out something funny to note, not trying to derive anything out of it.

denial - it can't be him!

Ignoring that part, what was interesting was the one resident who actually gave a name for the person who supposedly owned the building.

Come now, let's cut the projecting here . NO one is screaming anything on the level of what you are suggesting.

Come on now, try and make some sense and no need for passive-aggressive attacks, it's rude. At least substantiate your significant claims. I think you find it hard to do so. Wait, I forgot that you don't actually have a point ... sorry.

[dcharlie]

Come on now, try and make some sense and no need for passive-aggressive attacks, it's rude. At least substantiate your significant claims. I think you find it hard to do so. Wait, I forgot that you don't actually have a point ... sorry.

but the facts remain the same whoever says it

And what 'facts' are these ?

The locals saying it wasn't him is far from factual and an analogy to people screaming pythagoras suggests an acceptance of this as factual. Projecting one truth onto another statement.

Maybe your greater intelect is confusing us proles and you should stop using unnecessary analogies and just keep it "real talk" style. You know us sub 50 IQ guys struggle with the basics : breathing, reading, etc

as an aside, the guy who names the owner (?) also contradicts Skykid's "next door neighbour" too.

Ignoring that part, what was interesting was the one resident who actually gave a name for the person who supposedly owned the building.

worth looking at but... what's in a name? I though the courier and his brother owned the complex anyways? that was "established" earlier

[BryanM]

At least a couple FOX stations declared the death of Obama Bin Laden.

[austere]

And what 'facts' are these?

That none of the neighbours they could find to interview have corroborated the US story which you've taken as a prelude to anything else that follows.

You know us sub 50 IQ guys struggle with the basics : breathing, reading, etc

Heh, IQ tests are overrated though I know you're making a relative comparision. In my experience the only useful measure is that of stupidity and the scale goes to infinity. I do note your ailments though and I will keep them in mind for my future comments.

That was a joke by the way, I think people here are a little above-average in terms of intelligence. I wouldn't waste a second on a person I consider stupid, unless it was amusing or instructive to others. I would have a few month ago but I guess I'm getting old. My patience really is wearing out and I think it's time for me to take a break from forums for a while it's too distracting to have open in the background.

as an aside, the guy who names the owner (?) also contradicts Skykid's "next door neighbour" too.

I dunno, maybe you're right, but can you provide details? The one who provided a name can be disproven -- which is why the claim is possibly stronger than whatever the other guy said. It can be chased up. Anyway, I just did the polite thing and cross-checked Skykid's article claims and so they're not really dependent on the john birch society people. That was the point of my analogy...

At least a couple FOX stations declared the death of Obama Bin Laden.

I wish it was that soft of an error, that FOX guy said "president obama has just declared that president obama is dead". Man, he must have been so sad announcing his own death. XD

[dcharlie]

That none of the neighbours they could find to interview have corroborated the US story which you've taken as a prelude to anything else that follows.

Well, they agree something went down - which i don't think anyone is doubting. The neighbours have overwhealmingly said they don't believe it was Bin Laden which is completely understandable given the circumstances, but of everything i've seen the guy who names the apparent owner is the only person saying they knew the "Bin Laden" character and (assumingly) physically met him.

Heh, IQ tests are overrated though I know you're making a relative comparision. In my experience the only useful measure is that of stupidity and the scale goes to infinity. I do note your ailments though and I will keep them in mind for my future comments.

You are too kind ! i do know doctors, dentists and architects though! (Vic Reeves...)

That was a joke by the way, I think people here are a little above-average in terms of intelligence. I wouldn't waste a second on a person I consider stupid, unless it was amusing or instructive to others. I would have a few month ago but I guess I'm getting old. My patience really is wearing out and I think it's time for me to take a break from forums for a while it's too distracting to have open in the background.

Debate is all good as long as it really is debate and doesn't veer off into blind name calling. Deep breath and carry on - it's all good as long as it's not veering off into name calling / silly territory.

I dunno, maybe you're right, but can you provide details? The one who provided a name can be disproven -- which is why the claim is possibly stronger than whatever the other guy said. It can be chased up. Anyway, I just did the polite thing and cross-checked Skykid's article claims and so they're not really dependent on the john birch society people. That was the point of my analogy...

The Skykid quote guy basically said he didn't believe it was OBL but mentioned he'd never seen him . He goes on to says that security is extremely tight in the area and moving around often brings requests for ID from the military. So for the naming guy to say "but i know him - it's <name>! He owns the compound!" then i'd have expected more than one individual to be able to verify that, yet no one has (again, at the whim of possible bad journalism here). Not an impossible situation by any means, but he'd have to be pretty unlucky to be someone who happens to look like OBL and happens to have shacked up with his wives/kids/porn stash. (IF they are OBL's wives/kids/porn!)

[austere]

Debate is all good as long as it really is debate and doesn't veer off into blind name calling.

I never fired the first shot -- in fact I came here to end the silliness.

You are too kind ! i do know doctors, dentists and architects though! (Vic Reeves...)

Most dentists/doctors/architects I know of, I'd rate at 115~130 (i.e. at most 2 standard deviations above the mean) which is pretty meh.

The Skykid quote guy basically said he didn't believe it was OBL but mentioned he'd never seen him . He goes on to says that security is extremely tight in the area and moving around often brings requests for ID from the military. So for the naming guy to say "but i know him - it's <name>! He owns the compound!" then i'd have expected more than one individual to be able to verify that

That's not quite a contradiction though, which is what you stated, but fair enough.

By the way, there's a whole interview with (supposedly) his neighbour who could possibly corroborate the name: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0vo-L3VACs

Unfortunately it's (most likely) in Urdu or Punjabi and there's no translation.

[Skykid]

that you are constantly stating that Americans are naive and gullible

Don't remember saying that once.

Oh really? You have made a habit of implying it over and over again - in this thread and others. I don't think it is necessary to quote everything that you have stated in this thread alone.

That's because you can't quote anything to back up the statement.

You're reading between lines that aren't there. Go ahead and quote me where I have "constantly" implied US citizens are "naive and gullible" in this or any other thread.

I've always maintained US folk are strong of heart and solidarity, and I respect them for that. Being fed a load of drivel by an overbearing media and crooked government is not something I would ever hold against an individual.

Frankly, if US bashing is all you gleaned from the last 18 pages you have some insecurity issues.

[Kakizaki]

That's because you can't quote anything to back up the statement.

You're reading between lines that aren't there. Go ahead and quote me where I have "constantly" implied US citizens are "naive and gullible" in this or any other thread.

I've always maintained US folk are strong of heart and solidarity, and I respect them for that. Being fed a load of drivel by an overbearing media and crooked government is not something I would ever hold against an individual.

Frankly, if US bashing is all you gleaned from the last 18 pages you have some insecurity issues.

So you are faulting me for taking a page out of your book?

How about replace "U.S. citizens" with anyone who doesn't fall in line with what you believe. Would that make you feel better?

And nope, that isn't all I "gleaned" from this thread. Not much of an insecurity issue. I have no problems with what you believe - I can certainly understand where you are coming from some of the time. I have said that more than a few times - including the post you are responding to here, but you decided not to quote that portion. I was was simply commenting on how easily you accept information when it supports your suspicions / theories. Something I am fairly certain that you would or already have criticized others for. Nothing more, nothing less.

[DEL]

The word 'convenient' comes up yet again.
Officially silenced. A dead man cannot say "Yes I did it" or "No I didn't do it".

The proof of the body is not an issue for me. The issue is the silence.
That is all I have to say on the matter. A dead man cannot confirm or deny, nor can he have a trial in court
I see that Skykid has been attacked for daring to question the Government and Media on this one.
& neorichieb1971 said 'fishy'.
Well of course the Government never lies to us. There were Weapons of Mass Destruction in Saddam's Iraq

Conspiracy theorist - naaah. Like Skykid, just like to keep an open mind, that's all.

[CMoon]

[GaijinPunch]

I see that Skykid has been attacked for daring to question the Government and Media on this one.

Did you read the whole thread? Nobody's been attacked for daring to ask anything (except maybe if there is a Santa Claus).

[Acid King]

The word 'convenient' comes up yet again.
Officially silenced. A dead man cannot say "Yes I did it" or "No I didn't do it".

The proof of the body is not an issue for me. The issue is the silence.
That is all I have to say on the matter. A dead man cannot confirm or deny, nor can he have a trial in court
I see that Skykid has been attacked for daring to question the Government and Media on this one.
& neorichieb1971 said 'fishy'.
Well of course the Government never lies to us. There were Weapons of Mass Destruction in Saddam's Iraq

Conspiracy theorist - naaah. Like Skykid, just like to keep an open mind, that's all.

You're not being open minded when you assume the government is lying. The Iraq WMDs is a bogus analogy as we had plenty of information at the time that suggested the information presented was was incorrect. Not so much the case here.

[adversity1]

Prometheus:

Anyway, if you want to tell me 9/11 and AQs true intentions are different from what I think and what they're saying, that they're not in such a good position, or whatever else you're saying, point us to analysts who say so. Independent sources. It's all about that.

I don't disagree with you so much about the content of Al Qaeda's messages, I think you have a pretty good grasp of what it is they're saying. I just disagreed with the equivocation of AQ and the American government (while plainly endorsing neither).

My knowledge of Al Queda comes mostly from Lawrence Wright's excellent history, "The Looming Tower": http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/140003 ... 1400030846

I have some other names who seem to pop up regularly from their articles (John F. Burns, Robert Fisk) but that's the only book is the only one I can fully endorse, having read it.

Mainly, I just read the news. Al Jazeera, AP, New York Times, Haaretz, Dawn. Knowing what's happening on the ground, and comparing it to the rhetoric of the various factions is enough usually to understand where they're coming from. To be honest, Al Qaeda is not much of a focus to me since I started paying attention to news from the Middle East after 2001. They are a marginal group compared to people like Hezbollah and the Muslim Brotherhood, who are state-level players.

Actually, there has been a very informative documentary May 10th by Al Jazeera called: "I Knew Bin Laden"

http://english.aljazeera.net/programmes ... 15787.html

Features interviews with:

・bin Laden's former bodyguard
・The son of Abdullah Azim (one of the first people to start bringing Arab fighters to Afghanistan)
・Pakistani surgeon Amir Aziz, who verifies that bin Laden had no observable kidney problems in 2001 (surely of interest to Skykid, Udderdude and austere)
・Al-quds Al-arabiya editor Abdel Bari Atwan, who also verifies that bin Laden had no observable kidney problems in 2001 after staying with bin Laden for 3 days (surely of interest to Skykid, Udderdude and austere)

It goes over the founding of the group and its relations with the Afghan, Sudanese and Pakistani governments. Very educational for those who aren't familiar with the group.

With regards to the global weakening of Al-Queda, this has been basically a consensus of western intelligence since late 2009 really. Here are just a few articles I was able to find:

CIA director says secret attacks in Pakistan have hobbled al-Qaeda
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 02558.html

'A Time of Great Testing for Al-Qaida'
Bin Laden's Death and the Future of Violent Jihad
http://www.spiegel.de/international/wor ... 38,00.html

Al-Qaida faces recruitment crisis, anti-terrorism experts say
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/se ... ent-crisis

Al Qaeda in Iraq's shrinking area of operations
http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/ ... aqs_sh.php

------------------------------------------------------
More news.

Scores killed in Pakistan twin bomb attacks
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/asia/ ... 65706.html

Twin bomb blasts targeting a paramilitary training centre in northwest Pakistan have killed at least 76 people, mostly paramilitary personnel, and wounded at least 106 others, police and local officials say.

A police official said Friday's attack in Charsadda district appeared to be the work of two suicide bombers, though there was a possibility of the second bomb being planted.

The Pakistani Taliban has claimed responsibility for the attack, terming it the "first revenge" for the killing of Osama bin Laden, the al-Qaeda leader who was killed by US forces in Abbottabad on May 2.

"This was the first revenge for Osama's martyrdom. Wait for bigger attacks in Pakistan and Afghanistan," Ehsanullah Ehsan, a spokesman for the group, told the AFP news agency.

Al-Qaeda Threatens Obama's Grandmother

http://news.yahoo.com/s/atlantic/201105 ... other37633

ABC News is reporting that Kenyan police are guarding the home of President Obama's step-grandmother in Kenya around the clock after al-Shabaab, a Somalia-based al-Qaeda affiliate, threatened her life. ABC learns that while security was added to Sarah Hussein Obama's house the day after bin Laden's death, the the number of officers has increased since al-Shabaab leveled its threat, to the point where there are now enough officers to patrol her entire village of Kogelo in West Kenya, according to one police chief.

In an interview with ABC, Obama's 88-year-old grandmother (pictured above in 2008) didn't seem particularly concerned, however. "My life has not been affected in any way," she said. "If the government has decided to bring more security personnel, we are OK with it."

------------------------------------------------------
Back to austere's comment.

It's 2011 and we've had revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt without major fundamentalist presence, the same is happening in Syria now. By no means could the banner of Al-Queda nor any similar organization be raised at any of these rallies for human rights and democracy.

BAHAHAHAHAHA Geez, it's easy to mouth off a whole load of crap without knowing anything about a topic, bar what you see in the western mainstream media aye. The truth is, the same "Salafists" the US seems to love at the right opportunities (e.g. Chechenya, Afghanistan in the 80s and so on) are at it again in Syria. Half these guys aren't even from the country, you can see them killing an off duty soldier here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f9qHpH9x-QE (WARNING WARNING WARNING: EXTREMELY GRAPHIC -- Do not click this link unless you doubt my words.)

That is certainly a horrifying video (apparently from Dara'a, if Google Arabic is serving me). We already knew that some of the most brutal jihadis in the Iraqi civil war came from Syria, so it's not a surprise in that sense. I will say that I don't know enough about the context of the video to tell whether the people in it are related to the democracy movement, which is what I was referring to. What is the context? Where did you find it?

In comparison to this incident, Insan international, a Syrian human rights group reports that 632 people have been killed in the uprising by the government, and over 5000 have been "disappeared", most likely experiencing torture in detention. http://www.insanintl.com/

It's true, Salafists and Islamists were involved in the genesis of this protest movement, and have an influence on events probably larger than Egypt. Still, the core demands that the movement is aiming for: end of the emergency laws, enactment of civil liberties, end to arbitrary courts, resignation of Assad, have no definite Islamist content to them. It is also a mass movement. Had I made the same claim regarding the Libyan rebellion, obviously your point would stand.

Here are a couple of citations that back this up:

Analysts: Syria unrest not led by Islamists
Contrary to claims by Bashar al-Assad's regime, the role of Islamists in Syria's uprising is minor

http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent ... mists.aspx

Despite accusations by Syrian authorities, Islamists did not instigate and are not leading the unrest that has rocked the country for a month, although they are partners in the protests, analysts say.
"They are certainly present but they are not directing it. This popular uprising does not depend on the old political parties," said Rime Allaf, a researcher on Syria at London-based think-tank Chatham House.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Syria ... e_note-231

Under criticism from Internet activists for failing to acknowledge the Syrian uprising, Al Jazeera provided analysis of the largest opposition parties in Syria that might have great political influence in any change of power: Syrian People's Democratic Party, Muslim Brotherhood, National Salvation Front, Movement for Justice and Development, Reform Party, Arab Socialist Movement, Arab Socialist Union, Workers Revolutionary Party, Communist Party of Labour, and others.[232] On 9 March, Al Jazeera continued its reporting with an analysis of political detainees in Syria,[233] and two days later another special report reported that many activists indicated displeasure that the general decree of amnesty did not include political prisoners.[234] Al Jazeera launched an internet page for the Syrian revolt as part of their "Arab Revolution Spring" portal.[235]

My point was merely that Al Qaeda, and groups sharing their strict wahhabist anti-imperialist worldview, have not been effective in influencing any part of the Arab Spring. This is true even in Yemen, which is one of their safehavens. And this is what bin Laden was reacting to in his messages about the uprisings, he's attempting to make AQ relavent to people who don't care about them.

[DEL]

RE: The Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq
Acid King wrote;

You're not being open minded when you assume the government is lying. The Iraq WMDs is a bogus analogy as we had plenty of information at the time that suggested the information presented was was incorrect. Not so much the case here.

Yet your Government and mine still went to war on this 'incorrect information' as you put it.

With regards to the official death of Osama, I was not assuming that they are lying. I was stating the fact that he has been officially silenced (either recently as reported in the media or 10+ years ago as Skykid postulated).
Am I actually open minded about such things? Hell yeah. I stated years ago that I'll be happy to admit that I am wrong, when proof is presented.
However, I notice that the people who believe that the Government never lies to us are not open minded at all. I find them to be blinkered and so sure of themselves.
I am not sure, I'm just asking questions when things are hazy. I believe that is being open minded.

[Skykid]

That's because you can't quote anything to back up the statement.

You're reading between lines that aren't there. Go ahead and quote me where I have "constantly" implied US citizens are "naive and gullible" in this or any other thread.

I've always maintained US folk are strong of heart and solidarity, and I respect them for that. Being fed a load of drivel by an overbearing media and crooked government is not something I would ever hold against an individual.

Frankly, if US bashing is all you gleaned from the last 18 pages you have some insecurity issues.

So you are faulting me for taking a page out of your book?

How about replace "U.S. citizens" with anyone who doesn't fall in line with what you believe. Would that make you feel better?

And nope, that isn't all I "gleaned" from this thread. Not much of an insecurity issue. I have no problems with what you believe - I can certainly understand where you are coming from some of the time. I have said that more than a few times - including the post you are responding to here, but you decided not to quote that portion. I was was simply commenting on how easily you accept information when it supports your suspicions / theories. Something I am fairly certain that you would or already have criticized others for. Nothing more, nothing less.

I am also just as easily willing to accept and publicly state the reason for posting information, how solid I think that info is (as in, I wouldn't stake much on it), and not knowing a publication is actually right-wing and therefore admittedly biased. I didn't jump up and down over the article, just posted a link and a quote fer chrissakes.

Having those admissions completely ignored doesn't bother me - happens all the time. What does niggle is when someone pipes up and tells me I've contributed little to the argument except belittling US citizens for being 'naive and gullible' as you put it.

As you've now had an opportunity to review the thread and found that isn't the case, I'd appreciate if you would retract the statement. I kept it political, not racial.

[Acid King]

Yet your Government and mine still went to war on this 'incorrect information' as you put it.

With regards to the official death of Osama, I was not assuming that they are lying. I was stating the fact that he has been officially silenced (either recently as reported in the media or 10+ years ago as Skykid postulated).
Am I actually open minded about such things? Hell yeah. I stated years ago that I'll be happy to admit that I am wrong, when proof is presented.
However, I notice that the people who believe that the Government never lies to us are not open minded at all. I find them to be blinkered and so sure of themselves.
I am not sure, I'm just asking questions when things are hazy. I believe that is being open minded.

The only problem with your suggestion is that the government doesn't always lie. You need some information that undermines official events before you can determine if they're lying or not. As I said earlier, it's a question of credibility of information. At the time of Iraq, there was a lot of credible information that suggested that government was wrong and so it made sense to say "you're full of shit". What good, credible information suggests they're lying here? If the gov't accounts are true, what proof would suffice for you? Situations like this aren't clear cut and 100% reliable "proof" of something like this (or for example the 9/11 conspiracy stuff people espouse) will never exist because much of the information comes from the government and independent verifications are difficult, if not impossible, and subject to varying interpretations of events.

[Skykid]

Yet your Government and mine still went to war on this 'incorrect information' as you put it.

With regards to the official death of Osama, I was not assuming that they are lying. I was stating the fact that he has been officially silenced (either recently as reported in the media or 10+ years ago as Skykid postulated).
Am I actually open minded about such things? Hell yeah. I stated years ago that I'll be happy to admit that I am wrong, when proof is presented.
However, I notice that the people who believe that the Government never lies to us are not open minded at all. I find them to be blinkered and so sure of themselves.
I am not sure, I'm just asking questions when things are hazy. I believe that is being open minded.

The only problem with your suggestion is that the government doesn't always lie. You need some information that undermines official events before you can determine if they're lying or not. As I said earlier, it's a question of credibility of information. At the time of Iraq, there was a lot of credible information that suggested that government was wrong and so it made sense to say "you're full of shit". What good, credible information suggests they're lying here?

It's impossible to say 100% that the government has lied about every detail they released (if we could it would be breaking news). I certainly don't think the official story is a total falsehood, I'm confident some of what they say happened, happened. But there's plenty of credible reasons to suggest that the playing out of events, timing of the event, changing of information, obsfucating of information, lack of information, lack of evidence, lack of transparency, that there's a good chance there's plenty of absolute bullshit in the official story.

If you can agree that there's at least some bullshit in it and you're not 100% convinced that the story is word for word truth, then there's really no telling how big or small those lies are.

This argument is like fighting fire with fire. We say we're refusing to buy the official story because of [the playing out of events, timing of the event, changing of information, obsfucating of information, lack of information, lack of evidence, lack of transparency,]
and you guys say you're willing to side with the official story because there's not enough hard evidence to contrary.

The truth is we're all in the same idiot pen, squabbling over details and fencing with scraps of information. We're all just suckers on a need to know basis, and always will be.

[Acid King]

The only problem with your suggestion is that the government doesn't always lie. You need some information that undermines official events before you can determine if they're lying or not. As I said earlier, it's a question of credibility of information. At the time of Iraq, there was a lot of credible information that suggested that government was wrong and so it made sense to say "you're full of shit". What good, credible information suggests they're lying here?

It's impossible to say 100% that the government has lied about every detail they released (if we could it would be breaking news). I certainly don't think the official story is a total falsehood, I'm confident some of what they say happened, happened. But there's plenty of credible reasons to suggest that the playing out of events, timing of the event, changing of information, obsfucating of information, lack of information, lack of evidence, lack of transparency, that there's a good chance there's plenty of absolute bullshit in the official story.

If you can agree that there's at least some bullshit in it and you're not 100% convinced that the story is word for word truth, then there's really no telling how big or small those lies are.

This argument is like fighting fire with fire. We say we're refusing to buy the official story because of [the playing out of events, timing of the event, changing of information, obsfucating of information, lack of information, lack of evidence, lack of transparency,]
and you guys say you're willing to side with the official story because there's not enough hard evidence to contrary.

..and I've said before that there are plenty of reasons to be skeptical about the details because of the way they've changed (as is par for the course in almost every major news story), but most of the questioning doesn't involve problems with the details, but challenges to whether or not he was killed. You don't have to believe every word of the story and still accept that he really is dead and they really raided the compound.

[Skykid]

..and I've said before that there are plenty of reasons to be skeptical about the details because of the way they've changed (as is par for the course in almost every major news story), but most of the questioning doesn't involve problems with the details, but challenges to whether or not he was killed. You don't have to believe every word of the story and still accept that he really is dead and they really raided the compound.

Then we're closer to the same page than perhaps we realised.
The question for me was never 'if' he's dead - of that I'm pretty certain. It's more whether or not he was killed in this particular raid, or whether the raid is a ruse just to signify his death in political terms. If that was the case it would still be a lesser lie than some of those revealed in the past (such as Tonkin etc).
I'm skeptical because of the lack of information, the apparent obliviousness of the Pakistani govt. that OBL was on home turf, coupled with the lack of evidence, transparency etc that would easily corroborate the official story. It also seems sudden and drastically out of character for an (until now) relatively low-key US President.

It only takes skepticism over that one small detail to completely change your outlook, like a ripple in a pond. Because if he was actually dead prior to this event it raises questions that potentially unravel years worth of political and war based govt PR...

If there's one thing I'm almost 100% sure of, it's that we'll probably never really know now the body is 'officially' gone forever.

[Acid King]

Then we're closer to the same page than perhaps we realised.
The question for me was never 'if' he's dead - of that I'm pretty certain. It's more whether or not he was killed in this particular raid, or whether the raid is a ruse just to signify his death in political terms.

Which gets back to something we already went over and that is weighing information supporting his death in the early part of the decade vs. information supporting his death in the raid. In terms of that specific match up, I think there's much more to support him dying now versus then.

[Skykid]

Then we're closer to the same page than perhaps we realised.
The question for me was never 'if' he's dead - of that I'm pretty certain. It's more whether or not he was killed in this particular raid, or whether the raid is a ruse just to signify his death in political terms.

Which gets back to something we already went over and that is weighing information supporting his death in the early part of the decade vs. information supporting his death in the raid. In terms of that specific match up, I think there's much more to support him dying now versus then.

I don't, but let's just leave it there eh?

I don't even understand what you guys are ragging him on now.

Neither do I, my name keeps coming up even when I'm not posting much. Like some kind of forum piñata.

[DEL]

Skykid wrote;

Neither do I, my name keeps coming up even when I'm not posting much. Like some kind of forum piñata

^Hey only because I was away from the forum for a couple of weeks and read the first few pages of this thread

I see you're both still arguing on the date of death and proof of the body, but as I mentioned above, that doesn't matter, its almost a derailment from the more important fact that he has been silenced. No chance of statements from him, no chance of a trial in a court of Law. Just accusation and death.
The mystery continues.
In terms of new info, new revelations, its a dead end (if you'll forgive the pun).
So the death announcement has been made and no doubt the next phase will begin.

[GaijinPunch]

"Silencing him" is extremely risky, assuming he's not cut off from humanity 100%. What happens when a Republican is back in the white house and once to take a shit on the Democratic party, which will most likely happen. Highly unlikely... I'd buy the killed in 2001 story first.

[BulletMagnet]

What happens when a Republican is back in the white house and once to take a shit on the Democratic party, which will most likely happen.

When's the last time they (either party, really, though we've seen a lot more of that end lately) waited that long?

[Skykid]

What happens when a Republican is back in the white house and once to take a shit on the Democratic party, which will most likely happen.

That's the weirdest transposition of the word 'wants' I've ever seen.