Bin Laden was not buried at sea,

[Babe Ruth]

It’s quite possible for bin Laden to be in Rawalpindi, Pakistan on Sep. 10^th and Khandahar, Afghanistan by Sep. 13^th.

There were pictures released from Pakistani sources of the helicopter, building and dead guards. I’m not sure it would be sensible to release pictures of bin Laden... a bullet exit wound in his face is going to be hard to tidy up... and this gives away the assassination/kill mission... it doesn’t look great or do Obama any favour. I also don’t see that dumping the body at sea is unrealistic. Though, I do see what you mean about all of this resulting in somewhat lacking evidence. But overall I can’t make it fit. This elaborate stunt... for nothing. So help me. The motive I asked about? There isn’t anything is there?

You're assuming that he actually had a bullet hole in his face that day. Not necessarily a good assumption, all things considered.

[Little Fish]

It’s quite possible for bin Laden to be in Rawalpindi, Pakistan on Sep. 10^th and Khandahar, Afghanistan by Sep. 13^th.

from the article i posted above

"In patient dialysis treatment tends to be longer than 24 hours in most American hospitals, which suggests that Osama would have been discharged from the Hospital on or "after" September 11

If the CBS report is accurate and Osama had indeed been admitted to the Pakistani military hospital on September 10, courtesy of America's ally, he was in all likelihood still in hospital in Rawalpindi on the 11th of September, when the attacks occurred. In all probability, his whereabouts were known to US officials on the morning of September 12, when Secretary of State Colin Powell initiated negotiations with Pakistan, with a view to arresting and extraditing bin Laden."

my perception at the time from tv reports was that mushariff was being threatened by the US.

is it conceivable the pakistani authorities allowed bin laden to leave the country after the attacks? I don't think so. I think most likely he was detained in pakistan on september 11th, held in captivity to produce the bogeyman videos and messages, and that he probably died some years ago - I say that because there is no evidence in recent years of his being alive, and many people who were in a connected position to know have stated their belief that he died years ago.

There were pictures released from Pakistani sources of the helicopter, building and dead guards. I’m not sure it would be sensible to release pictures of bin Laden... a bullet exit wound in his face is going to be hard to tidy up... and this gives away the assassination/kill mission... it doesn’t look great or do Obama any favour. I also don’t see that dumping the body at sea is unrealistic. Though, I do see what you mean about all of this resulting in somewhat lacking evidence. But overall I can’t make it fit. This elaborate stunt... for nothing. So help me. The motive I asked about? There isn’t anything is there?

it has been speculated by Jerome Corsi that the initial operation was to do an "october surprise" to win the election, but as i said before things were getting hot politically for obama last year with regard to the birth certificate and it may have been decided to create a media event to take the heat off his administration. I don't see that issue as where obama was born, I see the issue as obama having authorised a fake document, and it was being revealed that he did in fact lie in releasing a fake birth certificate. this news management is done all the time. the timing of the raid just after the release of corsis book and the press were gathering momentum with the story.

the problem i have is that there is no evidence of osama being killed in that raid. if the raid were real as told, it would be expected that there were pictures or videos of a dead bin laden, witnesses of a dead bin laden, but above all a body of bin laden. sounds like a another jessica lynch scripted story.

[Q24]

Yeah, they don't want anyone to think badly of going on a kill mission..........so they admit it was a kill mission.

Although certain officials, and in my opinion analysis of the circumstances, have left no doubt this was a kill mission, Obama himself, the Navy SEAL known as ‘Mark Owen’ and others, have said that bin Laden would have been captured alive if possible – that appears to be the official line on it. My computer is playing up terribly at the moment (damn virus) so I can’t provide the links, but a quick Google search will confirm this for you. So, at least there is some ambiguity in the public mind to the question. It would end that ambiguity and not look good for the U.S. operation if determined that bin Laden were cowering on the floor and received a bullet to the back of the head.

You're assuming that he actually had a bullet hole in his face that day. Not necessarily a good assumption, all things considered.

I’m speculating there are potential reasons not to release pictures other than lack of a body.

from the article i posted above

"In patient dialysis treatment tends to be longer than 24 hours in most American hospitals, which suggests that Osama would have been discharged from the Hospital on or "after" September 11

If the CBS report is accurate and Osama had indeed been admitted to the Pakistani military hospital on September 10, courtesy of America's ally, he was in all likelihood still in hospital in Rawalpindi on the 11th of September, when the attacks occurred. In all probability, his whereabouts were known to US officials on the morning of September 12, when Secretary of State Colin Powell initiated negotiations with Pakistan, with a view to arresting and extraditing bin Laden."

my perception at the time from tv reports was that mushariff was being threatened by the US.

is it conceivable the pakistani authorities allowed bin laden to leave the country after the attacks? I don't think so. I think most likely he was detained in pakistan on september 11th, held in captivity to produce the bogeyman videos and messages, and that he probably died some years ago - I say that because there is no evidence in recent years of his being alive, and many people who were in a connected position to know have stated their belief that he died years ago.

It’s quite possible for bin Laden to be in Rawalpindi, Pakistan on Sep. 12^th and Khandahar, Afghanistan on Sep. 13^th.

I think you refer to Richard Armitage’s reported call to Musharraf threatening to ‘bomb Pakistan back to the Stone Age’, or some such words, had the U.S. not received co-operation with their ‘War on Terror’. There is no indication this occurred before Sep. 13^th, by which time bin Laden is reported to have been back in Afghanistan. Armitage’s first meeting with Pakistani officials and intelligence heads actually came on Sep. 13^th. Given this, don’t see it inconceivable that bin Laden may have had passage to travel freely for a day or two after 9/11.

Also the suggestion that bin Laden was held to produce his bogeyman videos and messages doesn’t fit from a Sep. 11^th timeline. Remember that bin Laden had twice denied responsibility for the attacks by Dec. 2001 – I think you agree that these refutations were genuine? There is some very convincing evidence that bin Laden was crossing the Tora Bora mountains between Afghanistan and Pakistan in Dec. 2001 and it is only after this time that the trail went terribly cold and the bogeyman videos were released.

Of course, there would be no evidence of bin Laden after that time except for the vetted video and message releases once the CIA/ISI whisked him away to a safehouse/detainment. And with reports of his death, that only suits the plan better. As we well know, we aren't likely to find what no one is looking for.

it has been speculated by Jerome Corsi that the initial operation was to do an "october surprise" to win the election, but as i said before things were getting hot politically for obama last year with regard to the birth certificate and it may have been decided to create a media event to take the heat off his administration. I don't see that issue as where obama was born, I see the issue as obama having authorised a fake document, and it was being revealed that he did in fact lie in releasing a fake birth certificate. this news management is done all the time. the timing of the raid just after the release of corsis book and the press were gathering momentum with the story.

Hmm... it’s not quite on the ‘new Pearl Harbor’ or ‘transforming event’ scale of motive.

And it raises so many problems...

For one, there is no way Obama can stage this event without prior certainty both that bin Laden is already dead and control of the body – we can’t have bin Laden ‘turning up’ or his remains found someplace else. This means that Obama would need to know exactly the time and location of bin Laden’s ‘real’ death beforehand to ensure the stunt would not come back to bite him. I have reason to believe that Obama is not singing from the same hymn sheet as Bush/Cheney and the other Neocons in Washington – they would not keep bin Laden on ice to pull Obama out of a hole - therefore, the ‘real’ death of bin Laden must have been under Obama’s presidency, and keeping the ‘real’ death quiet followed by the stunt must have been all of Obama’s doing. That means bin Laden would have only been killed from 2009 onward rendering those earlier death reports as false and/or propaganda.

For two, bin Laden’s death was never going to, nor did it, end the Obama birth certificate debate which existed from the beginning of his presidency and continued with some vigour beyond bin Laden’s death.

the problem i have is that there is no evidence of osama being killed in that raid. if the raid were real as told, it would be expected that there were pictures or videos of a dead bin laden, witnesses of a dead bin laden, but above all a body of bin laden. sounds like a another jessica lynch scripted story.

I do sympathise about the lack of evidence to a body, though I don’t think pictures should ever necessarily be “expected” – as mentioned above, it does Obama nor the U.S. any favour to broadcast the fact that it was a lawless and cold-blooded assassination. I know if I were the president and had ordered the killing, for legitimate reason that I can think of, then I wouldn’t want the pictures released either. I guess I don’t need to ask if you accept the Navy SEALs as witnesses of a dead bin Laden?

In all, I don’t understand why people go with this idea the raid was a stunt when there is a far better explanation fitting the circumstances and reports which, whilst still involving a conspiracy, doesn’t involve a somewhat elaborate operation for the sake of what I still see as little to no benefit.

[Babe Ruth]

Although certain officials, and in my opinion analysis of the circumstances, have left no doubt this was a kill mission, Obama himself, the Navy SEAL known as ‘Mark Owen’ and others, have said that bin Laden would have been captured alive if possible – that appears to be the official line on it. My computer is playing up terribly at the moment (damn virus) so I can’t provide the links, but a quick Google search will confirm this for you. So, at least there is some ambiguity in the public mind to the question. It would end that ambiguity and not look good for the U.S. operation if determined that bin Laden were cowering on the floor and received a bullet to the back of the head.

I’m speculating there are potential reasons not to release pictures other than lack of a body.

It’s quite possible for bin Laden to be in Rawalpindi, Pakistan on Sep. 12^th and Khandahar, Afghanistan on Sep. 13^th.

I think you refer to Richard Armitage’s reported call to Musharraf threatening to ‘bomb Pakistan back to the Stone Age’, or some such words, had the U.S. not received co-operation with their ‘War on Terror’. There is no indication this occurred before Sep. 13^th, by which time bin Laden is reported to have been back in Afghanistan. Armitage’s first meeting with Pakistani officials and intelligence heads actually came on Sep. 13^th. Given this, don’t see it inconceivable that bin Laden may have had passage to travel freely for a day or two after 9/11.

Also the suggestion that bin Laden was held to produce his bogeyman videos and messages doesn’t fit from a Sep. 11^th timeline. Remember that bin Laden had twice denied responsibility for the attacks by Dec. 2001 – I think you agree that these refutations were genuine? There is some very convincing evidence that bin Laden was crossing the Tora Bora mountains between Afghanistan and Pakistan in Dec. 2001 and it is only after this time that the trail went terribly cold and the bogeyman videos were released.

Of course, there would be no evidence of bin Laden after that time except for the vetted video and message releases once the CIA/ISI whisked him away to a safehouse/detainment. And with reports of his death, that only suits the plan better. As we well know, we aren't likely to find what no one is looking for.

Hmm... it’s not quite on the ‘new Pearl Harbor’ or ‘transforming event’ scale of motive.

And it raises so many problems...

For one, there is no way Obama can stage this event without prior certainty both that bin Laden is already dead and control of the body – we can’t have bin Laden ‘turning up’ or his remains found someplace else. This means that Obama would need to know exactly the time and location of bin Laden’s ‘real’ death beforehand to ensure the stunt would not come back to bite him. I have reason to believe that Obama is not singing from the same hymn sheet as Bush/Cheney and the other Neocons in Washington – they would not keep bin Laden on ice to pull Obama out of a hole - therefore, the ‘real’ death of bin Laden must have been under Obama’s presidency, and keeping the ‘real’ death quiet followed by the stunt must have been all of Obama’s doing. That means bin Laden would have only been killed from 2009 onward rendering those earlier death reports as false and/or propaganda.

For two, bin Laden’s death was never going to, nor did it, end the Obama birth certificate debate which existed from the beginning of his presidency and continued with some vigour beyond bin Laden’s death.

I do sympathise about the lack of evidence to a body, though I don’t think pictures should ever necessarily be “expected” – as mentioned above, it does Obama nor the U.S. any favour to broadcast the fact that it was a lawless and cold-blooded assassination. I know if I were the president and had ordered the killing, for legitimate reason that I can think of, then I wouldn’t want the pictures released either. I guess I don’t need to ask if you accept the Navy SEALs as witnesses of a dead bin Laden?

In all, I don’t understand why people go with this idea the raid was a stunt when there is a far better explanation fitting the circumstances and reports which, whilst still involving a conspiracy, doesn’t involve a somewhat elaborate operation for the sake of what I still see as little to no benefit.

You place great faith in Obama's certain knowledge of anything at all, in this case whether Osama was dead or alive.

Most US presidents know only what they are told by some advisor or the other. The average US president is but a puppet with no conscience or courage at all.

Little Fish makes a good point about the Birth Certificate Controversy as another motivating factor in coming out with the Abbottabad Myth.

Edited December 4, 2012 by Babe Ruth

[Q24]

You place great faith in Obama's certain knowledge of anything at all, in this case whether Osama was dead or alive.

Most US presidents know only what they are told by some advisor or the other. The average US president is but a puppet with no conscience or courage at all.

Little Fish makes a good point about the Birth Certificate Controversy as another motivating factor in coming out with the Abbottabad Myth.

Aha, so Obama didn’t know if bin Laden was dead or alive and he didn’t have the courage to question it but the powers that be who had bin Laden on ice deceived Obama to believe the latter and he thought it was an operation of his order but actually it was a stunt by the powers that be who found this the best moment to play their ace up the sleeve and intended, though failed, to save Obama from the birth certificate controversy?

Err... and that makes more sense than bin Laden being found and killed May 2^nd 2011?

Like... really??

[RaptorBites]

Little Fish makes a good point about the Birth Certificate Controversy as another motivating factor in coming out with the Abbottabad Myth.

No he most certainly DID NOT.

As evidence by the birther thread i attended a while back. He did not believe that OCR scanning software could produce the downloadable Obama BC. I had done it myself with my own BC and certainly had some (not all) the same results. Had asked him to do it with his own BC to see the same results but he had then disappeared from the thread.

So anything regarding his claim about Obama's BC is pure hogwash.

[Babe Ruth]

Aha, so Obama didn’t know if bin Laden was dead or alive and he didn’t have the courage to question it but the powers that be who had bin Laden on ice deceived Obama to believe the latter and he thought it was an operation of his order but actually it was a stunt by the powers that be who found this the best moment to play their ace up the sleeve and intended, though failed, to save Obama from the birth certificate controversy?

Err... and that makes more sense than bin Laden being found and killed May 2^nd 2011?

Like... really??

What makes that scenario more likely sir, is that politicians control the government, and while there should be considerations OTHER THAN politics in good governance, the sad reality is that political considerations, including reelection, frequently carry the day in what actually happens. On its best day, politics is a dirty business.

Making appointed leaders look better in the public mind is a very large part of day to day operations. It is the PERCEPTION that is being controlled and desired, not necessarily (seldom) the truth.

[Babe Ruth]

No he most certainly DID NOT.

As evidence by the birther thread i attended a while back. He did not believe that OCR scanning software could produce the downloadable Obama BC. I had done it myself with my own BC and certainly had some (not all) the same results. Had asked him to do it with his own BC to see the same results but he had then disappeared from the thread.

So anything regarding his claim about Obama's BC is pure hogwash.

Many pronouns there, but I assume you speak of Little Fish. I cannot speak for him, and perhaps I misunderstood his previous post that I referred back to.

I'm neutral on the birth certificate controversy, and not knowlegdeable enough about OCR and such to make an informed decision. However, "where there is smoke there is fire" comes to mind.

[Little Fish]

No he most certainly DID NOT.

As evidence by the birther thread i attended a while back. He did not believe that OCR scanning software could produce the downloadable Obama BC. I had done it myself with my own BC and certainly had some (not all) the same results. Had asked him to do it with his own BC to see the same results but he had then disappeared from the thread.

So anything regarding his claim about Obama's BC is pure hogwash.

it is the details that you are not mentioning. post#10 in that thread proves it is a fake. ocr does not do that, scanning maybe account for kerning and anti-aliasing, but not the details in post#10.

[RaptorBites]

it is the details that you are not mentioning. post#10 in that thread proves it is a fake. ocr does not do that, scanning maybe account for kerning and anti-aliasing, but not the details in post#10.

So, have you tried the scan yourself? Or are you still basing it off what what you think?

I still think the latter.

Besides, OCR does intentionally duplicate parts of the scan to minimize the file itself. So box 1 and box 2 can be duplicated in that process.

Edited December 5, 2012 by RaptorBites

[Little Fish]

So, have you tried the scan yourself? Or are you still basing it off what what you think?

I still think the latter

no i haven't, i don't have the equipment. a scanner is unlikely to reproduce 2 bitmaps identical to the pixel. I have worked with jpegs and scanners enough to know this, probably before most people even heard of jpeg. ask any graphics designer.

Besides, OCR does intentionally duplicate parts of the scan to minimize the file itself. So box 1 and box 2 can be duplicated in that process.

speculation. you mean adobe illustrator, ocr converts graphics to text. why weren't the other boxes duplicated? as I understand it, those two boxes are held as 2 different bitmaps, so there is no "minimizing" or space saving of the file. Edited December 5, 2012 by Little Fish

[Little Fish]

bin Laden being found and killed May 2nd 2011?

so do you subscribe to the notion that the whereabouts of bin laden was unknown to the US (and presumably the rest of the world) until ~May 2011?

[Q24]

so do you subscribe to the notion that the whereabouts of bin laden was unknown to the US (and presumably the rest of the world) until ~May 2011?

I think if we take out most of those elements responsible for 9/11 along with some others involved in the intelligence services (notably agents of the CIA and ISI), then the whereabouts of bin Laden were unconfirmed to the U.S. and rest of the world until May 2011. It fits, based on comments and actions, that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al, and elements of the aforementioned intelligence services, knew the whereabouts of bin Laden all along and it was with their agreement that the bogeyman was preserved in containment to fuel their particular ideology. However, I don’t see indication that Obama, or the CIA agents who tracked down bin Laden, or the Navy SEALs that killed bin Laden, had to be privy to the same information or a part of the former operation.

Edited December 7, 2012 by Q24

[Babe Ruth]

Just like the vanished Seal Team 6, Obama says and does what he is told to by those who control him.

[skyeagle409]

Just like the vanished Seal Team 6, Obama says and does what he is told to by those who control him.

Evidence please!! No evidence, no case !

[skyeagle409]

You place great faith in Obama's certain knowledge of anything at all, in this case whether Osama was dead or alive.

Most US presidents know only what they are told by some advisor or the other. The average US president is but a puppet with no conscience or courage at all.

We know when bin Landen was dead, and when he was alive. After all, he released tapes aimed at Obama, so we know he wasn't dead in 2001, 2002, 2006, or even in 2007. When was Obama elected to the presidency?

It didn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out!

Edited December 9, 2012 by skyeagle409

[skyeagle409]

bin laden was in rawalpindi, pakistan the day before 911.

http://globalresearc...es/CHO311A.html

possible

this conflicts with the first point.

I don't think bin laden was ever in afghanistan.

He was definitely in Afghanisan.

[DONTEATUS]

IT Boggles the Mind that People can even think other wise!

Bin Laden is Fish Food !

[skyeagle409]

IT Boggles the Mind that People can even think other wise!

Bin Laden is Fish Food !

There were those who have said that bin Laden was dead in 2001, yet we have tapes with his voice years afterward.

[pallidin]

Why do some argue about such ridiculiness.

Even his own people said he was dead.

Buried in the sea, buried in the desert sand, buried in a cave, who cares!!!!!!!!

He's dead!

[skyeagle409]

Why do some argue about such ridiculiness.

Even his own people said he was dead.

Buried in the sea, buried in the desert sand, buried in a cave, who cares!!!!!!!!

He's dead!

Yes indeed! Even al-Qaeda admitted that bin Laden was killed by American special forces, which explains why there was a leadership change within al-Qaeda in 2011.

Al-Zawahiri appointed al Qaeda's new leader, jihadist websites say

Ayman al-Zawahiri, the longtime deputy to Osama bin Laden, will take over leadership of al Qaeda, according to a statement posted on several jihadist websites Thursday. The United States believes that al-Zawahiri has indeed taken the helm of the terrorist network, according to a U.S. counterterrorism official.

Al-Zawahiri was widely regarded as al Qaeda's de facto leader since U.S. special forces killed Osama bin Laden at a hideout in Abbottabad, Pakistan, on May 2.

"Hereby the General Command of the Qaeda al-Jihad -- and after the end of the consultations -- we declare that Sheikh Dr. Abu Muhammad Ayman al-Zawahiri (may God bless him) will take over the responsibility of command of the group," the statement said, attributed to al Qaeda's "general command."

http://articles.cnn....ial?_s=PM:WORLD

Edited December 9, 2012 by skyeagle409

[skyeagle409]

Just like the vanished Seal Team 6, Obama says and does what he is told to by those who control him.

Burying bin Laden on land would be problematic for the United States, so burying at sea was the best option.

[lightly]

If all this is true, he would have had 'caretakers'. .. why take the body at all?¿?

[skyeagle409]

If all this is true, he would have had 'caretakers'. .. why take the body at all?¿?

In my opinion, terrorist could build a shrine around his body and use it as a focus point to draw terrorist from around the world and as a rallying point to inflame hatred to an even higher level. In other words, like throwing gasoline on the fire, but throw his body into the sea and these few words become familiar:

"Out of sight, out of mind"

Leaving his body behind or burying him on land to where terrorist can gather and go into a feeding frenzy presents an added risk that can be avoided by burying him at sea and you definitely will not bury him in the United States nor parade his body in public.

Just look at the level of disorderly conduct during the celebration of a super bowl win, which would be like children at the playground compared to what can happen if the body of bin Laden was paraded on 5th Avenue in New York City?

[acidhead]

In my opinion, terrorist could build a shrine around his body and use it as a focus point to draw terrorist from around the world and as a rallying point to inflame hatred to an even higher level. In other words, like throwing gasoline on the fire, but throw his body into the sea and these few words become familiar:

"Out of sight, out of mind"

Leaving his body behind or burying him on land to where terrorist can gather and go into a feeding frenzy presents an added risk that can be avoided by burying him at sea and you definitely will not bury him in the United States nor parade his body in public.

Just look at the level of disorderly conduct during the celebration of a super bowl win, which would be like children at the playground compared to what can happen if the body of bin Laden was paraded on 5th Avenue in New York City?

Yes the body should have been buried at sea to rid the earth of a extremist shrine. This shouldn't be disputed. What should be is the fact the body wasn't independently vetted as the rule of lawful procedure would need it to rule upon such a negligence action.

Edited December 10, 2012 by acidhead