The death of Osama Bin Laden

[Gary]

You're one hypocrite L1. "Oh you don't know how so and so actually work" and you do? Are you a top level member of X corporation? Are you a high ranking government official?

The same things that you have been saying to discredit the news "they are just being fed bullshit to tell everyone" can be applied to where ever you get your information. Where do you get your info L1? Other conspiracy theorists? Where do they get their information? What makes what the government says automatically wrong and where you get your information automatically right?

You don't have any facts, you have second hand opinions from other sources. Is Osama dead? Fact. Was he killed this past week? Fact. It's very hypocritical to say "oh he died years ago" when you don't know that's true either. You know what makes conspiracy theories, theories? Because very little to no truth is backing it up. It's just theories that X amount of people want to be true for some odd reason. Everyone has an agenda. Just as the government will release the information they want to release, the naysayers have their own agenda too. I don't know where you get your information, but with as skeptical as you seem to be you should of all people be skeptical of those sources and those source's agenda.

Point is, you're being unfair with your accusations.

My exact thoughts on this. How are your thoughts L-1 more true than ours who don't believe in the conspiracies you spout off? If you have facts put them up, if you don't then you are just as right as we are who actually believe that Osama was killed last week.

[Level-One]

You're one hypocrite L1. "Oh you don't know how so and so actually work" and you do? Are you a top level member of X corporation? Are you a high ranking government official?

I don't need to work for the Media to have a basic understanding on how they work. Are you disputing the fact that main-stream outlets have their own niches of readers they need to cater to; and conspiracy theories aren't one of them?

The same things that you have been saying to discredit the news "they are just being fed bullshit to tell everyone" can be applied to where ever you get your information. Where do you get your info L1? Other conspiracy theorists? Where do they get their information? What makes what the government says automatically wrong and where you get your information automatically right?

You're right. Unfortunately, very little of my information is from ''conspiracy'' websites. Actually, all of these inconsistances I have pointed out come within the mainstream media themselves. Independent media is usually good at pointing out these inconsistances leading readers to mainstream articles as a source to back up any claims which makes it a bit easier on me.

The ''official'' narrative about what occured has changed several times. If the truth is the truth, it doesn't need a handful of amendments done to a story, afterwards--this occurring AFTER inconsistencies are found, of course.

90% of what I wrote in this thread is based on what I perceive to be bullshit and why.

You don't have any facts, you have second hand opinions from other sources. Is Osama dead? Fact. Was he killed this past week? Fact. It's very hypocritical to say "oh he died years ago" when you don't know that's true either. You know what makes conspiracy theories, theories? Because very little to no truth is backing it up. It's just theories that X amount of people want to be true for some odd reason. Everyone has an agenda. Just as the government will release the information they want to release, the naysayers have their own agenda too. I don't know where you get your information, but with as skeptical as you seem to be you should of all people be skeptical of those sources and those source's agenda.

Facts? They changed their official story, FACT. They won't release any photos, FACT. They haven't released the raid video (does it even exist?), FACT. They put out a fake situation room photo to mislead viewers, FACT. Several media ran with fake photos of Osama dead, FACT. Proceed to blame said photos on ''crazy conspiracy theorists'', FACT. They said they dumped his body in the ocean, FACT. They've been hyping the ''new terrorists'' and subsequent attacks hours after this news was announced, FACT.

The only conspiracy theory is if they killed him or not; all of the above are attributes to why I think they didn't and I haven't even touched any real conspiracy bullet points, yet and doubt I'll even bother.

You don't know what happened anymore then you claim I don't. The only difference is the ''officials'' said it happened and you're going to take their word, fine with me. I'm not. Government lies. Conspiracies exists in every walk of life and is not confined to serial killers and made for television movies. Conspiracy theories are conspiracy theories because the government says so. The U.S Government said torture was a conspiracy. The ''Bilderberg'' group was a conspiracy, now admitted exists--downplayed and all. The fucking MAFIA was a conspiracy for god sakes.

They exist.

Point is, you're being unfair with your accusations.

You don't need to agree with me. In fact, I'm not even trying to convince anyone--I'm just explaining my point of view since several people seem to take an issue with it.

So, do I believe everything is a conspiracy? No. Do you believe NOTHING is a conspiracy? How's that for a question...

[RickRampage]

See, the thing is L-1, a lot of the things you're pointing to and trying to use to show us that it's a conspiracy is actually more the reason to believe it's not. The changing of the story and all that jazz in which you say shows that something is fishy is actually less fishy than what you would lead us to believe. If Osama had been dead for sometime and Obama decided to release the information to gain some points in the polls, then why wasn't the story squared away before any information was released? I am sorry, but I am pretty sure if I am smart enough to think up at least squaring away the story before releasing it, I am sure that Obama and the rest are smart enough as well. Also, when the release first happened and the media started getting calls, you probably had a few different people making the calls and each media outlet probably heard something slightly different depending on who was telling it.

Also, that points out another thing to prove that it occurred last Sunday. Even though the President might have watched live satellite video of the raid, he wouldn't have had all the information yet because Seal Team Six hadn't been debriefed yet. Once they were debriefed and how events actually went down got to the White House, we had a more consistent story. You scream conspiracy, I call it normal because that's the way it works. Also, you say us having no video of the raid is cause to believe this is a conspiracy. Umm, quick question. The President has a video that's high resolution and shot from outer space; now sure, movies tend to show you these really high resolution videos from a satellite, but no one actually knows what our capabilities are. Can you actually make out who some one is, or is it fuzzy? Could these satellites be a threat to our right to privacy? So okay, let's say people around the world believe our satellite video is as high resolution as the movies show; what if it isn't and they release, then everyone knows what are capabilities are. Or even worse, say they are as high resolution or even better. What if they could watch me pick my nose and be able to tell what color the booger is? Oh my god, they can invade my privacy, these satellites need to go offline. Yeah, I am sorry, they'll catch more hell for releasing a raid video which is highly classified because of the technology behind it, then they will for not releasing it.

Secondly, I don't need to see a picture of Osama, but they said it will be eventually released. So there you have it, and okay, there were fake death photos which got blamed on conspiracy theorists. You don't like that because you are a conspiracy theorist and blame it on the government. How about blaming it on the 16 year old kid with way too much time on his hand who probably made them and posted them and emailed them around as a joke. Also, what is the point of the government releasing them and then calling them fake? You say to discredit any conspiracy theorist who tries to uncover the truth, but the simple fact of the matter is that's just paranoia talking. You see, that's the beauty of conspiracy theories this early on and at a time where there is a lot of information available. There is absolutely no proof whatsoever and conspiracy theorists act as if random things point to an obvious conspiracy and call us stupid for not believing them.

Now, here is the beauty of it all. And you can call this bullshit and what not, but I have a theory of my own. Conspiracy theorist started around the same time as people became highly involved in wanting to question everything. My theory is that one person asked a question that couldn't be answered at the time, which some one thought was obviously a lie, and so the first conspiracy began. While yes it is good to question some things, you need to learn when to have faith and believe that some things are too big to cover up. Yes, we have tried covering things up in other places outside of the US, but it has always failed because too many people are involved and they can't be kept quiet unless you kill them, which brings in others and so on and so forth. Thing is, the only cover ups that ever work are the ones that happen here and the people in the know can be limited.

Also, another key point. Reporters love a story, and if it's the truth, a reporter will go after it. So yes, if they have a foreign source saying hey, Osama has been dead for years, this is bullshit; then trust me, that reporter is going to get all the proof they need to back it up, because if they can prove a cover up of this size happened, and they publish it, they'll win all sorts of prizes and become the most sought after reporter in all the world. That's the type of story a reporter can make their career off of, and trust me, reporters have a tendency of not caring about what is in the best interest of others. They jump at trying to find the truth and think about the consequences later. You want to spend your time creating conspiracy theories, go look at the Catholic Church, there is a bunch there to be had.

[Kieran King]

Independent media is usually good at pointing out these inconsistances leading readers to mainstream articles as a source to back up any claims which makes it a bit easier on me.

I'm in a different country. We're getting the message that Osama is dead, and recent. Al-Qaeda has confirmed it. When the enemy is saying it, and you still don't believe it, then you simply can't be convinced.

The ''official'' narrative about what occured has changed several times. If the truth is the truth, it doesn't need a handful of amendments done to a story, afterwards--this occurring AFTER inconsistencies are found, of course.

Actually, as has already been said, it tends to lend to the situation being true, rather than made up, as more information comes to light. Want to know how people are lying? A good indicator is that the story is too perfect, too rehearsed. That's a proven psychological characteristic we have. And yes, I'm qualified to talk about psychology.

Facts? They changed their official story, FACT. They won't release any photos, FACT. They haven't released the raid video (does it even exist?), FACT. They put out a fake situation room photo to mislead viewers, FACT. Several media ran with fake photos of Osama dead, FACT. Proceed to blame said photos on ''crazy conspiracy theorists'', FACT. They said they dumped his body in the ocean, FACT. They've been hyping the ''new terrorists'' and subsequent attacks hours after this news was announced, FACT.

Yet they've provided reasoning for all of it. You can choose not to believe that, but their reasoning is generally consistent with trying not to incite any more backlash than what the death is already likely to do. It's a delicate political issue, so they're unlikely to appease everybody. Hell, I disagree with a lot of it myself, as I think he should've been taken alive so he can stand trial. Just because I don't like it, doesn't mean they're lying to me though.

Oh, and also, Bush could really have done with the popularity boost. If he had gotten Osama, then there would've been less (though perhaps not significantly less) opposition to the war as one of the main goals would've been accomplished when nothing else seems to be. That would've made his job a little easier. Also, considering his popularity was astonishingly low, and a common conversation when his term ended was whether or not he was one of the worst presidents in history, he could DEFINITELY have used the popularity points.

I'll admit that there may be holes in the story. It's not my government, so I'd like to think I've got a good chance (maybe just a comparatively better chance) at getting a pretty fair understanding of what's going on, though I'm also cynical enough to not take everything at face value. The thing is, no matter how many holes there are in the US government's story, there's a hell of a lot more in yours though. Occam's razor, man. The conspiracy is just too convoluted to be taken seriously with the information that we have.

[Level-One]

Also, that points out another thing to prove that it occurred last Sunday. Even though the President might have watched live satellite video of the raid, he wouldn't have had all the information yet because Seal Team Six hadn't been debriefed yet. Once they were debriefed and how events actually went down got to the White House, we had a more consistent story. You scream conspiracy, I call it normal because that's the way it works. Also, you say us having no video of the raid is cause to believe this is a conspiracy. Umm, quick question. The President has a video that's high resolution and shot from outer space; now sure, movies tend to show you these really high resolution videos from a satellite, but no one actually knows what our capabilities are. Can you actually make out who some one is, or is it fuzzy? Could these satellites be a threat to our right to privacy? So okay, let's say people around the world believe our satellite video is as high resolution as the movies show; what if it isn't and they release, then everyone knows what are capabilities are. Or even worse, say they are as high resolution or even better. What if they could watch me pick my nose and be able to tell what color the booger is? Oh my god, they can invade my privacy, these satellites need to go offline. Yeah, I am sorry, they'll catch more hell for releasing a raid video which is highly classified because of the technology behind it, then they will for not releasing it.

Obama never watched the raid live. The picture that I posted of them ''watching it'' wasn't them actually watching it. This was a lie. Hilary Clinton has stated along the lines that ''she doesn't know what she was watching'' she was just covering her face because of ''allergies''; the feed wasn't ''working''.

This satalite bunk your pulling out of you hat is a bunch of nonsense. They would have had cameras mounted on their helmets. The technology they ''would'' be using is already made public. Is there really a need to just make shit up to explain away every inconsistency in this bullshit story?

Secondly, I don't need to see a picture of Osama, but they said it will be eventually released. So there you have it, and okay, there were fake death photos which got blamed on conspiracy theorists. You don't like that because you are a conspiracy theorist and blame it on the government. How about blaming it on the 16 year old kid with way too much time on his hand who probably made them and posted them and emailed them around as a joke. Also, what is the point of the government releasing them and then calling them fake? You say to discredit any conspiracy theorist who tries to uncover the truth, but the simple fact of the matter is that's just paranoia talking. You see, that's the beauty of conspiracy theories this early on and at a time where there is a lot of information available. There is absolutely no proof whatsoever and conspiracy theorists act as if random things point to an obvious conspiracy and call us stupid for not believing them.

I love the entire ''We're thinking about releasing the photo'' as to make the doubters and believers, believe that it actually exists. And then they don't release it, followed by ''we might release it later'' to again, make everyone who doubts it think about it actually existing in the back of their minds. If they were serious about it, they would have just made the decision; and came out with, ''we're not going to show you the photo'' instead of playing the mind game, mini-op. Of course, maybe this wasn't done on purpose... government loves us. Don't forget to vote!

Anyways, you probably didn't even see the fake photo several media outlets ran with. You missed the entire point on why the photo would be put out but really, forget it. They said it would ''eventually'' be released? Why not now? Oh, I know... because they'll wait until nobody is paying attention, release something that IMO would be photo shopped, and let the somewhat political concious discuss and in fight with each-other on internet message boards for yet another distraction while the banks pillage and rob, everyone. The latter half of that is merely the effect (not a conspiracy by the government) but they DO plan to release it when things have died down and nobody really cares.

I also didn't say the government released that photo. I said the media picked it up (it's been on the internet already for about 3 years prior) and ran it in their stories. THERE ARE STILL PEOPLE OUT THERE THAT BELIEVE IT IS REAL. That was the point. People don't have attention spans any more. Most people (or a ''large'') portion of people just read headlines, or pay attention to a story when it first comes out--they aren't following this like me or you are a week after the fact. The media knows this.

Now, here is the beauty of it all. And you can call this bullshit and what not, but I have a theory of my own. Conspiracy theorist started around the same time as people became highly involved in wanting to question everything. My theory is that one person asked a question that couldn't be answered at the time, which some one thought was obviously a lie, and so the first conspiracy began. While yes it is good to question some things, you need to learn when to have faith and believe that some things are too big to cover up. Yes, we have tried covering things up in other places outside of the US, but it has always failed because too many people are involved and they can't be kept quiet unless you kill them, which brings in others and so on and so forth. Thing is, the only cover ups that ever work are the ones that happen here and the people in the know can be limited.

The Manhattan Project had around 150, 000 involved and it was basically kept secret amongst the population--or is that a conspiracy too?

And FYI, they're whistle-blowers all over. You just don't bother to listen. Most ''commit suicide'' or end up in car ''accidents'' while others are intimidated and threatened into silence. Death bed confessions make sense but those people are just trying to make a ''legacy'' of themselves. And if by god they do speak out, it doesn't matter if they WORKED for the government or directly in the said conspiracy, they're just looking for ''fame'' or ''money'', right? I've seen this over and over which is why I don't even know why I am even bothering to respond to this none sense, sigh.

Whistleblower on (1 week in) Osama: Steve Piezcenik.

Also, another key point. Reporters love a story, and if it's the truth, a reporter will go after it. So yes, if they have a foreign source saying hey, Osama has been dead for years, this is bullshit; then trust me, that reporter is going to get all the proof they need to back it up, because if they can prove a cover up of this size happened, and they publish it, they'll win all sorts of prizes and become the most sought after reporter in all the world. That's the type of story a reporter can make their career off of, and trust me, reporters have a tendency of not caring about what is in the best interest of others. They jump at trying to find the truth and think about the consequences later. You want to spend your time creating conspiracy theories, go look at the Catholic Church, there is a bunch there to be had.

I don't look to ''create'' conspiracies. I'm not that smart.

Though do have a good point. I'm sure you'll get a few reporters on this truth nugget. However, they'll likely be independent reporters looped in with the conspiracy ''holocaust never happened'' and ''UFO in my backyard'' fodder group and written off, per usual. A majority reporters these days, are there to tow the company and thus government line and it just that simple. You'll never see a guy like Anderson Cooper call conspiracy, even if it planned to bite him in the ass.

Kieran...

I'm in a different country. We're getting the message that Osama is dead, and recent. Al-Qaeda has confirmed it. When the enemy is saying it, and you still don't believe it, then you simply can't be convinced.

Confirmed it? Are you referring to the anonymous website forum post, Sam has posted in here? If it is, no. That isn't proof. You don't know who Al-Qaeda is, as do I.

Actually, as has already been said, it tends to lend to the situation being true, rather than made up, as more information comes to light. Want to know how people are lying? A good indicator is that the story is too perfect, too rehearsed. That's a proven psychological characteristic we have. And yes, I'm qualified to talk about psychology.

Nope. When a large portion of people are doubting the ENTIRE STORY in saying it never happened; it could be just as reasonable that they purposefully put out smaller lies within the official narrative to make the large story itself, seem legit. ''Well, okay they OSAMA didn't use his wife as a shield and there wasn't a fire fight... but we still killed him!'' And don't tell me the doubters aren't on the white houses mind... they're freaking out about it.

Dr. Steve Piezcenik is far more then qualified in PsyOps and actually has agreed with what has been stated above as to what they are actually doing.

And before you call CONSPIRACY, if it's a proven psychological fact and the government is ''too smart'' to get their own story wrong if it was a set up, wouldn't it be possible that this is in fact what is happening?

Lastly, the story is real simple in my mind... it never happened. It really is one of the more simpler conspiracies that could have existed. Everything else is lies, piled on top of lies, explanations that make little sense, contradictions and a desperate attempt by the media/government to provide evidence, all in which, isn't evidence.

Some random ass post on a message board isn't evidence (considering they've done this before with Osama leaving messages on message boards, lol) Video of the compound itself, isn't evidence--nobody is saying that the compound never existed. DNA isn't evidence; because the claim is that he's ''bin'' dead already.

Evidence is taking his body to the US soil (despite what the terrorist fear mongers say)
Evidence is releasing photos (despite the what the terrorist fear mongers say)
Evidence is releasing video (despite what the terrorist fear mongers say)
Evidence is explaining how he could possibly live as long as he did with the health conditions he had...

I'm sure there is more that I just can't bother to think up at this point.

I think the images of thousands of American's celebrating in the streets in the Death of Osama, as well as actively bombing the shit of the middle east killing millions is enough to get the ''terrorists'' riled up--providing the evidence to prove he's dead doesn't hurt America, it helps America because maybe then they could restore some faith in those who doubt them. These types of explanations are BULLSHIT and I'm sorry if you don't agree.

And yes, some people WONT buy it, even if all four bullet points were/was provided + more... but most will. Me included.

So, you can keep believing what the government tells you about their own conspiracy they may or may not be involved in; I'll be waiting for the actual proof, not bullshit chat room logs or bums sat in-front of old Osama footage watching himself on TV touted as proof. It's a fucking joke!

[Rebel Child]

L-1 I just want to clear up one thing.. Because I did read that article.

That article you're citing about Hiliary Clinton and her allergies?

She states word for word, she does not know what she was watching at that milisecond  Not that the feed wasn't working.

Link: http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_theticket/20110505/pl_yblog_theticket/hillary-clinton-suggests-allergies-responsible-for-her-appearance-in-situation-room-photo

The photo above has already attained the status of journalistic history: It shows the Obama administration's senior national security team monitoring the mission targeting Osama bin Laden's compound in Abbottabad. In the shot, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton sits with a hand clasped over her mouth as the raid unfolds in real time.

But Clinton suggested Thursday that her seeming emotional reaction to the raid's progress may not come from concern or anticipation; instead, it may have to do with her allergies.


"I am somewhat sheepishly concerned that it was my preventing one of my early spring allergic coughs," she told reporters in Rome. "So, it may have no great meaning whatsoever."

She added that she can't shed any additional light on just what she and her fellow national security advisers were witnessing at just that moment.

"I have no idea what any of us were looking at at that particular millisecond," she said.


The AP notes that there's been plenty of ongoing speculation about the context for the image. However, it doesn't seem like much evidence will emerge to clear these questions up anytime soon: White House officials say that supplying that context in greater detail might compromise intelligence efforts and capabilities.

Perhaps there are some questionable things out there, however, you need to be fair and represent the journalism as it is, and in this case the Associated Press, and state what they have published, and not what has been 'heard' or 'mis-interpreted'

Just my two cents and now I bow out of the conversation.

[Level-One]

Thanks, Cindy. Yes, that was the article. I doing my best at the time to paraphrase having read it a few days ago; the feed not working came from another discussion earlier I had with someone else for why they US couldn't show the us all the footage, so I probably should have left that bit out. It's not a conspiracy, I swear. 

I don't get the whole ''I don't know what I saw in that millisecond bit'' though. Why does that matter? I don't quite get why a split second is relevant to watching footage itself.

So, basically if this happened like they said it did and the photo wasn't in fact staged--the footage DOES exists. I guess, I'll be proven wrong when it get's released then and we can all see it for ourselves. Either way, I'm looking forward to it-- because at this point, I'm not sold.

[Triple B]

I think it's fairly obvious that George W. Bush flew remote controlled airplanes into the WTC to take down the towers on 9/11 after putting all the passengers in Gitmo to distract the nation from operatives working in Hawaii to plant documentation showing that a Kenyan who's mother was an American Citizen was really born in America so that after he was raised as a Muslim and took the oath of office on the Koran that he could then pretend to kill the guy that we pretended masterminded the whole thing from the beginning 10 years after he supposedly did it and almost 2 years before a major election where if this happened closer (much like Terror Levels being raised close to 2004's election) it would help him but at this point does nothing, other than to distract us from the fact that Obama is pushing through a law to make us all citizens of the New World Order.

Google it man, it MUST be true, right?

[Kieran King]

And don't tell me the doubters aren't on the white houses mind... they're freaking out about it.

Oh, so that explains why they continue to refuse to display the photos, because they're so scared of the doubters, right? Oh wait, here's your response:

There are no photos.

Dude, even if Bin Laden died years ago as is your particular claim, there would've been photos taken THEN. They could release them now. "What about time stamps?" Isn't the Government in your head so all-powerful and evil that they'd be able to manipulate that relatively easily?

Dr. Steve Piezcenik is far more then qualified in PsyOps and actually has agreed with what has been stated above as to what they are actually doing.

So you'll believe anything that Piezcenik says, but not what Obama, or Hillary Clinton, or (insert politician here who is also far more qualified to judge, and probably has a lot more info on the subject than Piezcenik). It sounds to me like you just pick and choose who you listen to, as long as it fits your argument.

And before you call CONSPIRACY, if it's a proven psychological fact and the government is ''too smart'' to get their own story wrong if it was a set up, wouldn't it be possible that this is in fact what is happening?

Or, alternatively, we could just go with the method that makes the fewer assumptions, because you know... that's how we've made all the technological advances we have in the world.

Are there gaps in the knowledge we have? Absolutely. Would I like things cleared up more? Yes. Hell, I'd like a body too. But the info we have leads itself to both of these conclusions (as well as others, should we talk about Obama being a reptile here too?):

A happened, therefore B happened.
Or, B happened because of C, but we'll make it look like it was because of A

The assumptions in the second aren't needed,

Evidence is taking his body to the US soil (despite what the terrorist fear mongers say)
Evidence is releasing photos (despite the what the terrorist fear mongers say)
Evidence is releasing video (despite what the terrorist fear mongers say)
Evidence is explaining how he could possibly live as long as he did with the health conditions he had...

And yes, some people WONT buy it, even if all four bullet points were/was provided + more... but most will. Me included.

No, I don't think you will. You'll just call it forged all because they didn't produce it right away. Just like what's happened with Obama's birth certificate.

[Level-One]

First in regards to the article cindy posted; here's why I added the ''didn't watch it live'' bit. It wasn't in the same article but the situation is basically directly related to it.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/al-qaeda/8493391/Osama-bin-Laden-dead-Blackout-during-raid-on-bin-Laden-compound.html

So, again going by this article:

- Obama missed at least 20-25 minutes of the raid live
- Obama didn't see Osama Bin Laden be killed

So, it doesn't prove that the photo is staged or anything but that's where that comes from. Also, I'm wondering if they ever covered this tidbit on Mainstream media (television) or if Obama even addressed why he didn't note the blackout that apparently occurred in the compound.

Oh, so that explains why they continue to refuse to display the photos, because they're so scared of the doubters, right? Oh wait, here's your response:

There are no photos.

Dude, even if Bin Laden died years ago as is your particular claim, there would've been photos taken THEN. They could release them now. "What about time stamps?" Isn't the Government in your head so all-powerful and evil that they'd be able to manipulate that relatively easily?

Sure, but they'd have to shoot an already dead man (who probably died of natural causes) in the head first after unfreezing him. I'm not quite sure how plausible that is.

It also means they would have planned all these details out before he died in 2001 under this assumption; which I never said occurred.

How about he just died naturally in hospital and has been buried in an unmarked grave? Let's go with that one! It's not like they need photos, any ways. You don't think the government knows the majority eats this shit up? Hypothetically speaking, let's say what happened happened... the government CAN get away with these types of lies on the grandeur scale because most people aren't paying attention. Some are stupid, most are just really busy and don't have time working 8+ hours a day... I don't blame them; but let's not pretend this isn't a reality.

It's not like when this news came out; the majority of people were ''Oh, they killed Osama. Let's wait for some details'' it was ''THEY KILLED OSAMA, GRAB OUR FLAGS AND LET'S PARTY IN THE STREETS'';

So you'll believe anything that Piezcenik says, but not what Obama, or Hillary Clinton, or (insert politician here who is also far more qualified to judge, and probably has a lot more info on the subject than Piezcenik). It sounds to me like you just pick and choose who you listen to, as long as it fits your argument.

Why would I believe the conspirators of the conspiracy theory?

Considering he no longer holds a high powered government position; he's sorta, you know... at liberty to talk? Those involved will likely never reveal themselves because if there is a conspiracy, it's a crime.

Or, alternatively, we could just go with the method that makes the fewer assumptions, because you know... that's how we've made all the technological advances we have in the world.

Are there gaps in the knowledge we have? Absolutely. Would I like things cleared up more? Yes. Hell, I'd like a body too. But the info we have leads itself to both of these conclusions (as well as others, should we talk about Obama being a reptile here too?):

MMM, reptile talk. How about we talk about no planes on 9/11, the holocaust never happening, goat sucking chupacabras,  UFO and alien invasions while we're at it. Anyone whoever questions anything, obviously believes in the reptile shape shifting peoples!

A happened, therefore B happened.
Or, B happened because of C, but we'll make it look like it was because of A

The assumptions in the second aren't needed,

No, I don't think you will. You'll just call it forged all because they didn't produce it right away. Just like what's happened with Obama's birth certificate.

So, in other words... we're done here. At some point, the straw men and personal attacks gotta' come out--at least we made it through a page before it happened.

I never called the Obama's BC forged. Though, tons of photo shoppers do! I'm not even a birther, LOL.

Triple B, hooking up with the big fat assist! You know, if it's all so CRAZY--you may want to just let it speak for itself rather then attempting to make it sound ''crazier'' then it already ''is'';

Your post reminds me of an article I read by some fucking cunt. His first talking point about this conspiracy, was about people asking if they can ''carry shampoo on planes now'' that we got Osama... as if that's what people are complaining about. Of course, he fails to mention people are actually asking if TSA still needs to stick their hands down their pants and run them through body scanners... but hey, that sounds far more reasonable then the shampoo thing!

With that, I'm done with this for at least a day. Too much writing.

[Ian "Wolfie" Trumps]

First in regards to the article cindy posted; here's why I added the ''didn't watch it live'' bit. It wasn't in the same article but the situation is basically directly related to it.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/al-qaeda/8493391/Osama-bin-Laden-dead-Blackout-during-raid-on-bin-Laden-compound.html

So, again going by this article:

- Obama missed at least 20-25 minutes of the raid live
- Obama didn't see Osama Bin Laden be killed

So, it doesn't prove that the photo is staged or anything but that's where that comes from. Also, I'm wondering if they ever covered this tidbit on Mainstream media (television) or if Obama even addressed why he didn't note the blackout that apparently occurred in the compound.

Sure, but they'd have to shoot an already dead man (who probably died of natural causes) in the head first after unfreezing him. I'm not quite sure how plausible that is.

It also means they would have planned all these details out before he died in 2001 under this assumption; which I never said occurred.

How about he just died naturally in hospital and has been buried in an unmarked grave? Let's go with that one! It's not like they need photos, any ways. You don't think the government knows the majority eats this shit up? Hypothetically speaking, let's say what happened happened... the government CAN get away with these types of lies on the grandeur scale because most people aren't paying attention. Some are stupid, most are just really busy and don't have time working 8+ hours a day... I don't blame them; but let's not pretend this isn't a reality.

It's not like when this news came out; the majority of people were ''Oh, they killed Osama. Let's wait for some details'' it was ''THEY KILLED OSAMA, GRAB OUR FLAGS AND LET'S PARTY IN THE STREETS'';

Why would I believe the conspirators of the conspiracy theory?

Considering he no longer holds a high powered government position; he's sorta, you know... at liberty to talk? Those involved will likely never reveal themselves because if there is a conspiracy, it's a crime.

MMM, reptile talk. How about we talk about no planes on 9/11, the holocaust never happening, goat sucking chupacabras,  UFO and alien invasions while we're at it. Anyone whoever questions anything, obviously believes in the reptile shape shifting peoples!

So, in other words... we're done here. At some point, the straw men and personal attacks gotta' come out--at least we made it through a page before it happened.

I never called the Obama's BC forged. Though, tons of photo shoppers do! I'm not even a birther, LOL.

Triple B, hooking up with the big fat assist! You know, if it's all so CRAZY--you may want to just let it speak for itself rather then attempting to make it sound ''crazier'' then it already ''is'';

Your post reminds me of an article I read by some fucking cunt. His first talking point about this conspiracy, was about people asking if they can ''carry shampoo on planes now'' that we got Osama... as if that's what people are complaining about. Of course, he fails to mention people are actually asking if TSA still needs to stick their hands down their pants and run them through body scanners... but hey, that sounds far more reasonable then the shampoo thing!

With that, I'm done with this for at least a day. Too much writing.

TNA is just on the verge of breaking out...oh wait...wrong thread

[Kieran King]

Of course I used a straw man argument, because based on what we know so far, it seems just as ludicrous an assumption.

You're perfectly within reason to question details the Government provides. That's pretty much the point of a democracy, where the people try to hold their leaders responsible for their actions. And yeah, it's a dick move on their behalf to not provide some of the evidence. I really don't like the whole 'dropping the body in the ocean' thing. That's some bullshit right there.

What you've done goes beyond questioning the details, and instead substituting even less substantiated evidence (or even no evidence at all) to make your particular claim.

To break away from the straw man, and look at your argument, there appears to be two parts.

A: It didn't happen the way they said it did.
B: Therefore it happened like this....

A doesn't necessitate B, but A is the only evidence you've actually provided for B. A simple statement of "they're hiding something from us" I can buy, but you leap to conclusions based on nothing.

[Triple B]

Level One... just because you're batshit crazy and sleep in tin foil sheets doesn't mean you need to bust out the fat jokes.

[Gary]

Honestly why is it so fucking hard to believe that he was killed last week? Why does everyone feel the need to make a conspiracy out of ANYTHING the goverment does, sometimes things are what they are.