Bin Laden was not buried at sea,

[Babe Ruth]

I wonder if those were the same US Forces that determined how Pat Tillman died?

[skyeagle409]

I wonder if those were the same US Forces that determined how Pat Tillman died?

Friendly fire.

Thank you.

you are welcome!

[Babe Ruth]

Sky

Are you able to recall the FIRST story offered as to how Tillman died?

Are you able to recall how many times the Pentagon told that story to Mary Tillman?

[skyeagle409]

Sky

Are you able to recall the FIRST story offered as to how Tillman died?

What is it now? Confusion during the first stages of a report is nothing knew.

[AngelOfBetrayal]

What is it now? Confusion during the first stages of a report is nothing knew.

This much is true. In the rush to be 'exclusive', and 'first on the scene' often a few different variations emerge without being thoroughly checked for accuracy.

[skyeagle409]

This much is true. In the rush to be 'exclusive', and 'first on the scene' often a few different variations emerge without being thoroughly checked for accuracy.

Here is a very good example.

http://www.eonline.com/news/438793/asiana-crash-tv-station-apologizes-for-reporting-offensively-wrong-pilots-names-ntsb-blames-intern-for-confirmation

http://blog.sfgate.com/matierandross/2013/07/12/1937/

[Babe Ruth]

Nice dodge, Sky. That selective amnesia at work again.

[DecoNoir]

Nice dodge, Sky. That selective amnesia at work again.

(Sigh) So how about that critical mass BR?

[skyeagle409]

Nice dodge, Sky. That selective amnesia at work again.

Is that all you can come up with? The media has been known for getting the facts wrong as in your case on a regular basis.

[Sweetpumper]

Have you guys posted the report that said they didn't release pics because Seal Team put over 100 bullets in him?

[skyeagle409]

Have you guys posted the report that said they didn't release pics because Seal Team put over 100 bullets in him?

No, because that story is false.

[DONTEATUS]

Who gives a Rats A$$ anymore , We know He`s dead and turned into Fish Food !

[Sweetpumper]

No, because that story is false.

Okay. Here it is, anyway:

A new report at SOFREP, a website for U.S. special operations forces, claims to shed light on the issue of why photos of slain al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden's body were never released to the public. According to unnamed sources within the special ops community, the images would have been excessively gory, because contrary to reports from officials and those involved in the operation, U.S. troops fired countless rounds into bin Laden's body after killing him.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/13/osama-bin-laden-death-shooting_n_4958147.html

[skyeagle409]

Okay. Here it is, anyway:

http://www.huffingto..._n_4958147.html

Unnamed sources is a keyword. A single shot that took off part of his head is all it took to kill him. Do you see over 100 bullet holes in the walls? Pop, pop, and bin Laden was history.

Edited March 14, 2014 by skyeagle409

[skyeagle409]

Who gives a Rats A$$ anymore , We know He`s dead and turned into Fish Food !

It is amazing how gullble some conspiracy tolks are and then, post that false and misleading information on the Internet..

[AngelOfBetrayal]

While it's true that a number of stories can emerge through over-eager newsreporting, the stories usually (and I realise that's a generalisation) converge. There's elements that appear in all of them, or facts that alter through the various versions...

Regarding Bin Laden's death there have been 6 completely different "official stories" and at least one officially released photograph proved to have been falsified (almost certainly faked by the media, rather than the Government, but still...). It's an unusual case, and it's perfectly understandable people have questions.

[aquatus1]

Countless rounds into the body? That sound like the U.S. Navy Seals, one of the top special forces teams in the world? In a raid where children were know to be on the premises?

[DONTEATUS]

I think any Navy Seal would of let off a few for the Giffer !

[Babe Ruth]

Unnamed sources is a keyword. A single shot that took off part of his head is all it took to kill him. Do you see over 100 bullet holes in the walls? Pop, pop, and bin Laden was history.

Unnamed sources IS the keyword. That is absolutely standard fare for most statements from government personnel in today's media.

Always unnamed, anonymous. That's how today's government and media roll....

[skyeagle409]

Unnamed sources IS the keyword. That is absolutely standard fare for most statements from government personnel in today's media.

Unnamed sources who have been planting disformation so that folks like you would the time to repost that disinformation.

Always unnamed, anonymous. That's how today's government and media roll....

Posting and reposting disinformation, misinformation, and lies, some of which were planted to discredit the conspiracist in the first place, is how 911 conspiracist work.

Edited March 15, 2014 by skyeagle409

[AngelOfBetrayal]

Unnamed sources who have been planting disformation so that folks like you would the time to repost that disinformation.

Posting and reposting disinformation, misinformation, and lies, some of which were planted to discredit the conspiracist in the first place, is how 911 conspiracist work.

So what about named sources???

Which of the official stories from the three people in the team sent on the mission is accurate? All three are incompatible, all three are massively contradictory and these are people who were there (or at least claim they were, I believe 2 are considered official, one is a little dubious). Plus the whitehouse's official stance has changed at least once, and those 2 stories don't match up with the stories of the members of the team?

Why are there people rotting in a cell somewhere for disclosing military secrets, who will remain there for years, while members of that particular team are allowed to write books, go on TV, or write their account for magazines without repercussions at all?

Why can no official account of Bin Laden decide whether he was a kidney patient or not? Why do falsified photo's of his corpse exist at all?

Was he armed?

Was his wife there? Whereabouts?

Was his daughter there?

To accept one story is to call 5 other stories false. If 'team member A' is accurate, the Whitehouse is lying. If the Whitehouse is accurate, 2 official representatives of the US military are lying, and continue to be allowed to lie.

[skyeagle409]

So what about named sources???

American Airlines confirming the loss of United 93 and United 175 and American Airlines confirming the loss of American 11 and American 77?

Which of the official stories from the three people in the team sent on the mission is accurate? All three are incompatible, all three are massively contradictory and these are people who were there (or at least claim they were, I believe 2 are considered official, one is a little dubious). Plus the whitehouse's official stance has changed at least once, and those 2 stories don't match up with the stories of the members of the team?

Can you be a bit more specific? Provide details.

Why are there people rotting in a cell somewhere for disclosing military secrets,...

Is there a problem locking someone up in prison for disclosing military secrets?

Why can no official account of Bin Laden decide whether he was a kidney patient or not?

According to Osama bin Laden's doctor and even bin Laden himself, there was nothing wrong with his kidneys. Who was the person who concocted the lie that bin Laden suffered from kidney failure?

Why do falsified photo's of his corpse exist at all?

Photos of bin Laden have not been released to the public, which once again, who has been spreading disinformation and lies on the Internet? Could part of that problem involve a number of people who have been discrediting the 911 Truth Movement by deliberately posting disinformation and lies in an effort to discredit the movement? Yes!

After all, who would in their right mind would accept a hoaxed story that the WTC buildings were nuked? 911 Truthers. That false story is on par with a false story that the U.S. government created steel-eating thermites that eventually destroyed the WTC buildings.

Was he armed?

Considering that bin Laden is seen in photographs with a weapon nearby, chances are he could very well have been armed and had a weapon available nearby, however, and in my opinion, taking bin Laden alive was not an option because that would have created a problem for the United States.

Was his wife there?

Yes

Whereabouts?

Saudi Arabia.

Was his daughter there?

Yes, as confirmed by Pakistani sources.

To accept one story is to call 5 other stories false. If 'team member A' is accurate, the Whitehouse is lying. If the Whitehouse is accurate, 2 official representatives of the US military are lying, and continue to be allowed to lie.

Did American Airlines and United Airlines confirm the loss of American 11, American 77, United 93 and United 175? Are those airlines considered government agencies?

Edited March 16, 2014 by skyeagle409

[AngelOfBetrayal]

American Airlines confirming the loss of United 93 and United 175 and American Airlines confirming the loss of American 11 and American 77?

Erm... Massively not the subject at hand...

"Bin Laden was not buried at sea,"

Can you be a bit more specific? Provide details.

I believe 3 members of the team that went round to Bin Laden's house have released their story. One in a book, one in an in-depth piece for a magazine, and one in a piece for an American News station (I *think* CNN, but I'm not certain.). All three of these descriptions of the event are different from each other, and different in turn from the Whitehouse's official stance (Which in itself has been drastically different twice). 5 Official stories that are different, logically, that means 4 official stories that are wrong.

Is there a problem locking someone up in prison for disclosing military secrets?

That's a very individual question, based on personal morality. However, the rule should apply across the board. If disclosing military secrets warrants a 35 year sentence, then it should apply to EVERYONE, not just on a pick-and-choose basis.

According to Osama bin Laden's doctor and even bin Laden himself, there was nothing wrong with his kidneys. Who was the person who concocted the lie that bin Laden suffered from kidney failure?

10 years ago (ish) EVERY news media, and every official line was that Bin Laden was a dialysis patient. When did that official line change and why?

Photos of bin Laden have not been released to the public, which once again, who has been spreading disinformation and lies on the Internet? Could part of that problem involve a number of people who have been discrediting the 911 Truth Movement by deliberately posting disinformation and lies in an effort to discredit the movement? Yes!

The photo I'm talking about was from an official source. I'm not posting it here, because it's graphic. But it's clearly a manipulation of two separate photos. I, personally, think it was a newspaper that doctored it in the first place, but it's pretty obvious that lies can come from the officials as well the hard-core CT-ers

After all, who would in their right mind would accept a hoaxed story that the WTC buildings were nuked? 911 Truthers. That false story is on par with a false story that the U.S. government created steel-eating thermites that eventually destroyed the WTC buildings.

It's a pretty low debating tactic to assume the worst of people you talk to. Taking the most unlikely CT and assuming EVERYONE asking questions belong to the same vocal minority to demonstrate your own intellectual superiority. Most 'Truthers' don't think there were Nukes involved, most don't think Thermite, or holograms, or fake planes were involved. An awful lot of people just have some rational questions about things. But again, let's stay on topic.

Considering that bin Laden is seen in photographs with a weapon nearby, chances are he could very well have been armed and had a weapon available nearby, however, and in my opinion, taking bin Laden alive was not an option because that would have created a problem for the United States.

Again, only 2 of the 5 official stories, have Bin Laden armed. Which official sources are you saying are wrong? Who's lying the military or the whitehouse? 'cause you seem to have decided which story is true... So who, specifically is accurate?

Yes, as confirmed by Pakistani sources.

The same Pakistani sources that said it wasn't even Bin Laden? The same Pakistani sources that said Bin Laden died in 2001? The same Pakistani sources that said the whole event is a lie?

I'm not saying those things are true, but you can't use sources one minute and then deny them another time. You trust them, or not, Not selective belief.

Did American Airlines and United Airlines confirm the loss of American 11, American 77, United 93 and United 175? Are those airlines considered government agencies?

Irrelevent to the topic.

Saudi Arabia

Indeed. The 11 year, multi-billion dollar project to find Bin Laden involving Thousands of forces and dozens of intelligence agencies found Bin Laden.

In his house.

Where we knew he was all along.

And that's not 'odd' at all?

[skyeagle409]

I believe 3 members of the team that went round to Bin Laden's house have released their story. One in a book, one in an in-depth piece for a magazine, and one in a piece for an American News station (I *think* CNN, but I'm not certain.). All three of these descriptions of the event are different from each other, and different in turn from the Whitehouse's official stance (Which in itself has been drastically different twice). 5 Official stories that are different, logically, that means 4 official stories that are wrong.

Accounts that differ are nothing new. For an example, after and accident, there are usually differing accounts of what happened, and the news media is not immuned either,

That's a very individual question, based on personal morality. However, the rule should apply across the board. If disclosing military secrets warrants a 35 year sentence, then it should apply to EVERYONE, not just on a pick-and-choose basis.

That depends on what level of classified information was released. You can take a look at the Walker family and they untold damage they caused to national security vs. an individual who released low-level information on page 45 of an aircraft technical .manual. Who do you think should get 35 years in prison vs. 5 years?

10 years ago (ish) EVERY news media, and every official line was that Bin Laden was a dialysis patient. When did that official line change and why?

Osama bin Laden's doctor went public and said there was nothing wrong with bin Laden's kidneys and the story of Osama bin Laden's kidneys was found to by a myth. At first, Gen. Pervez Musharraf endorsed the notion, in January 2002, when he said that bin Laden was dead for the reason he is a patient, he is a kidney patient,” he told CNN, however, Gen. Musharraf again sat down with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, and basically reversed himself, but tthe damage was done.

We can also take a look at the interview of Dr. Aziz.

Interview of Osama bin Laden's Doctor

The doctor said he had given bin Laden a “complete physical” in 1999 and treated him for back injuries after bin Laden was thrown from a horse. “His kidneys were fine,” the doctor told Mr. Haven. He said “If you’re on dialysis, you have a special look. I didn’t see any of that,” and added that bin Laden “was walking. He was healthy.” Aziz was emphatic: “I did not see any evidence of kidney disease; I didn’t see any evidence of dialysis.”

Aziz later discussed the dialysis issue with the New York Times. “When I hear these reports, I laugh. I did not see any evidence.” He has good reason to laugh — legions of Westerners have bought the story that bin Laden is on dialysis, with no proof at all.

http://www.washingto...2153r/?page=all

That is a perfect example of how unfounded conspiracy theories are concocted. In other words, the story that Osama bin Laden died in 2001 had kidney problems was nothing more than a myth.It shoudl have been noted that bin Laden released a number of video and audio tapes years after 2001, but why were CT'ers unable to make any connections to tapes released by bin Laden years after the 911 attack before concocting another unfound conspiracy theory?

The photo I'm talking about was from an official source. I'm not posting it here, because it's graphic. But it's clearly a manipulation of two separate photos. I, personally, think it was a newspaper that doctored it in the first place, but it's pretty obvious that lies can come from the officials as well the hard-core CT-ers

I can give you another such example. A photo of clean-up crews at ground zero working with the aid of a flashlight. The image was cleaned up but 911 Truthers took the photo and claimed it was evidence of molten steel. I had to post the video in order to drown out that false claim, but it shows just how quickly unfounded conspiracy theories are hatched due to total ignorance of the facts..

It's a pretty low debating tactic to assume the worst of people you talk to. Taking the most unlikely CT and assuming EVERYONE asking questions belong to the same vocal minority to demonstrate your own intellectual superiority. Most 'Truthers' don't think there were Nukes involved,...

Which was very obvious considering that nukes are weapons of mass destruction.

...most don't think Thermite,

Which is understandable considering thermite could not have brought down the WTC buildings, yet those who made the claim were most vocal and other CT folks jumped on their bandwagon as well.

...or holograms, or fake planes were involved. An awful lot of people just have some rational questions about things.

Some of those false stories were deliberately planted to discredit the conspiracy folks whereas, CT'ers brought those false stories to the table and claim they were evidence of a 911 conspiracy.

Again, only 2 of the 5 official stories, have Bin Laden armed.

In some photos and videos, you will see a weapon close at hand so it can be assumed that he was armed, however, armed or not, there would have been a problem bringing bin Laden back alive and no small problem at that..

Which official sources are you saying are wrong? Who's lying the military or the whitehouse? 'cause you seem to have decided which story is true... So who, specifically is accurate?

What team killed Osama bin Laden? What did they say? Even the White House is not immuned to inaccurate reports and neither is the military, which I know that as a fact and from first hand experience.

The same Pakistani sources that said it wasn't even Bin Laden?

Let's take a look.

Bin Laden’s daughter confirms her father shot dead by US Special Forces in Pakistan

Wednesday, 04 May 2011

Senior Pakistani security officials said Osama bin Laden’s daughter had confirmed her father was captured alive and shot dead by the US Special Forces during the first few minutes of the operation carried out at the huge compound in Bilal Town, Abbottabad.

http://english.alara.../04/147782.html

The same Pakistani sources that said Bin Laden died in 2001?

I don't think that you are aware that Pakistan eventually reversed itself on that false report, however, there are those who didn't bother to do their homework to make that determination, which only added fuel to the fire of flawed conspiracy theories that bin Laden died in 2001.

The same Pakistani sources that said the whole event is a lie?

Pakistani sources who have reversed themselves upon receving updated information.

There are a number of methods to make a deterrmination as to the validity of a story, but it seems there are those who are comfortable with concocting unfounded conspiracy theories rather than doing homework.

Edited March 16, 2014 by skyeagle409

[DONTEATUS]

So all the people in the know,Show us Bin -Laden !

I thought so !