Oops, 7 Days. Hey look I don't update on weekends.

You're crazy if you think we killed Osama yesterday

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/02/bin-laden-body-buried-sea

Come on, this is a big WTF. US can't show body because we "buried it at sea" within 24 hrs "in accordance with islamic customs" (except it's not) and don't worry because we took DNA samples?

Come on, this is the biggest load of shit I've seen from this administration so far.
Permalink Idiot 
May 2nd, 2011 1:56pm
Why sure, we ALWAYS bury critical enemies of the US at sea as soon as we've caught and killed them.  Why, there's an old tradition of... Oh, wait, no, we really don't.

Instead we hold them, or their mangled bodies, for evidence, for testing, for DNA sequencing, for future information.  This is America, where we have entire TV programs on Crime Scene Investigation.

We don't just "disappear" people.

The best explanation I've heard so far is that they don't want to be forced to produce pictures, or even body-parts, from now into the future.  But for that, a cover story of "burial at sea" is as good as the real thing.  Better, because then you can keep the body without having to reveal that.  MUCH better than "yeah, his body was burned to death in the building", because then it might be "unrecognizable".
Permalink SaveTheHubble 
May 2nd, 2011 2:04pm
I don't care if we did or didn't kill him yesterday or 3 years ago.  As long as most of America believes that we did, maybe we can FINALLY stop wasting money and political will on this bullshit.  It seems funny that this comes shortly after the Pentagon Chiefs of Staff published a paper saying that we need to stop hyper-focusing on the terrorism bullshit already.
Permalink muppet 
May 2nd, 2011 2:06pm
"US can't show body "

I'm sure they have pictures. Dumping at corpse at sea doesn't remove proof. Better still will be the actions of the organization now.

But really, what *do* you mean by "show a body"? Put it on display in a plexiglass box in the national mall?
Permalink df 
May 2nd, 2011 2:07pm
Oh, sure DF, because anything short of a glass case isn't really "showing a body"?
Permalink SaveTheHubble 
May 2nd, 2011 2:08pm
Yes, the real story here is trying to figure out WTF they are thinking.

If it was possible he might still be alive, we wouldn't have done this because it would look TERRIBLE to have him come out with a video saying "Yes this is Jun 3 2011 and this is my message to Obama, who says he killed me but I am still not dead."

So we must know for a fact he is dead. Had health problems. Probably died of natural causes some time back, right around when we started saying "Ah yes, the hunt is NOT for Osama and he is not even wanted by the US." But then Obama wanted a war trophy to put it all behind us and ordered up the dog and pony show. Which is fine I guess, but it sets a terrible precedent.
Permalink Idiot 
May 2nd, 2011 2:11pm
And of course, by "show the body", we USUALLY mean some appointed set of doctors will, at the very least, perform a post-mortem.  You know, dental records, DNA checking, pictures of the corpse, descriptions of wounds, etc.

If all you've got is some Navy Seal/CIA operative saying "Oh, yeah, you can't have that, we buried him at sea", that completely lacks credibility.
Permalink SaveTheHubble 
May 2nd, 2011 2:11pm
Yeah absolutely, and given the profile of the guy, it just makes the whole thing nuts.

On the other hand, this might be another Obama Pro Troll like with the "lost" birth certificate and after listening to complaints from Trump for a few months, he'll release a video of 4 hrs of intensive dental record checks.

Not that we have dental records on Osama though right? Or even bin Laden DNA samples? But who knows, maybe we have that stuff.
Permalink Idiot 
May 2nd, 2011 2:16pm
"And of course, by "show the body", we USUALLY mean some appointed set of doctors will, at the very least, perform a post-mortem.  You know, dental records, DNA checking, pictures of the corpse, descriptions of wounds, etc. "

How do you know they didn't do that? They flew him back to Afghanistan and apparently did a full work up.
Permalink df 
May 2nd, 2011 2:24pm
He's still alive. They're interrogating him now.

When they've drained him of every ounce of potentially usable information, they'll kill him, photo it, and back date the photographs.
Permalink MobyDobie 
May 2nd, 2011 2:26pm
Do you thin it's a ploy to get Osama to reveal himself?  I can't think of any other reason to propagate such a huge lie.
Permalink Kenny 
May 2nd, 2011 2:28pm
It'd be a stupid ploy. If he smuggles out a video tape and is shown to be alive, that would be handing him a huge propaganda victory over the US.

He's alive but captured. That's the only explanation. He'll be killed quitely later after they've got as much info out of him as possible.

A CIA official told reuters that the Seal team had orders to kill not capture him. That's just dumb. If they could capture him alive and get info out of him, don't you think they'd want to?

So why do this?

1. AQ won't know what we got out of him

2. AQ won't take hostages demanding his release (some terrorists in the 70s were supposedly killed for the same reason - see RAF)

3. After capturing him, the US publicly killing him after a trial, or just extra-judicially, would be a loser. So capture and kill quietly is the obvious answer.
Permalink MobyDobie 
May 2nd, 2011 2:38pm
Idiot: "US can't show body because we "buried it at sea" within 24 hrs "in accordance with islamic customs" (except it's not)"

You are an idiot. No one is claiming that "burial at sea" is an Islamic custom.
Permalink armchair Freud. 
May 2nd, 2011 2:44pm
I know they didn't do that, because you can't do that in 24 hours.  It takes longer.  Shoot, it would take a few weeks just to put together the LIST of people who should be at the autopsy.
Permalink SaveTheHubble 
May 2nd, 2011 2:46pm
My theory also explains the Obama birth certificate release.

If releasing a birth certificate after years isn't an undue delay - waiting a few days or weeks for photos of a dead Osama will seem like a minor delay.

(I'm not saying the certificate is important or matters - I'm saying it's been used as a subtle way to acustom us to delays before documents/evidence are released).
Permalink MobyDobie 
May 2nd, 2011 2:48pm
>>No one is claiming that "burial at sea" is an Islamic custom.

Actually, that's how I heard it on the radio this morning.

It was a WTF moment, but some news outlets are spouting that line.
Permalink LH 
May 2nd, 2011 2:51pm
The US killed Osama yesterday.

There is no great conspiracy. It is the only logical explanation.

There is no reason for them to pretend they killed him when they didn't. Capturing him covertly serves no purpose at all -- the guy isn't likely to know anything about anything contemporary in the terrorist world, but would represent an enormous liability.

I'm sure the US has all the proof they want. I'm sure they took dental prints, we know they took DNA and pictures, and they even had him identified by a woman at the compound. I'm sure all of that will come out. Right now it's less than 24 hours since when he was killed and people are complaining that they can't smell his corpse themselves.

And the "we dumped him at sea" thing makes total sense. Not that they did -- the body might be in a morgue somewhere -- but that they don't have to worry about people trying to liberate or celebrate his corpse.
Permalink df 
May 2nd, 2011 2:57pm
LH: "It was a WTF moment, but some news outlets are spouting that line."

Idiot's link doesn't say it.

It's certainly possible that some news outlets are "spouting" that line. And anybody with any sort of knowledge should see it as not true.
Permalink armchair Freud. 
May 2nd, 2011 2:59pm
The thing that's supposedly an Islamic custom is burying someone within 24 hours.  It's easy to see how that could get distorted.
Permalink Ward 
May 2nd, 2011 3:07pm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/02/sea-burial-osama-bin-laden

Mohammed al-Qubaisi, Dubai's grand mufti, said of Bin Laden's burial: "They can say they buried him at sea, but they cannot say they did it according to Islam. Sea burials are permissible for Muslims in extraordinary circumstances. This is not one of them."

Abdul-Sattar al-Janabi, who preaches at Baghdad's Abu Hanifa mosque, said: "What was done by the Americans is forbidden by Islam and might provoke some Muslims.

"It is not acceptable and it is almost a crime to throw the body of a Muslim man into the sea. The body of Bin Laden should have been handed over to his family to look for a country to bury him."
Permalink Idiot 
May 2nd, 2011 3:27pm
"President Barack Obama said the remains had been handled in accordance with Islamic custom, which requires speedy burial, and the Pentagon later said the body was placed into the waters of the northern Arabian Sea after adhering to traditional Islamic procedures."
Permalink Idiot 
May 2nd, 2011 3:28pm
"They can say they buried him at sea, but they cannot say they did it according to Islam," Mohammed al-Qubaisi, Dubai's grand mufti, said about bin Laden's burial. "If the family does not want him, it's really simple in Islam: You dig up a grave anywhere, even on a remote island, you say the prayers and that's it."

"Sea burials are permissible for Muslims in extraordinary circumstances," he added. "This is not one of them."

But Mohammed Qudah, a professor of Islamic law at the University of Jordan, said burying the Saudi-born bin Laden at sea was not forbidden if there was nobody to receive the body and provide a Muslim burial.

"The land and the sea belong to God, who is able to protect and raise the dead at the end of times for Judgment Day," he said. "It's neither true nor correct to claim that there was nobody in the Muslim world ready to receive bin Laden's body."
Permalink Idiot 
May 2nd, 2011 3:29pm
Quoted by Idiot: "Abdul-Sattar al-Janabi, who preaches at Baghdad's Abu Hanifa mosque, said: "What was done by the Americans is forbidden by Islam and might provoke some Muslims.

"It is not acceptable and it is almost a crime to throw the body of a Muslim man into the sea. The body of Bin Laden should have been handed over to his family to look for a country to bury him."

You -are- an idiot!

No doubt, there were constraints on "handing over" the body to anybody. Clearly, the US wasn't too hot on him being buried in some "country". Of course, anything that one could have done "might provoke" some Muslims.

Maybe, if UBL wasn't a terrorist mastermind, people would be in a better position to complain about the disposition of his body.
Permalink armchair Freud. 
May 2nd, 2011 3:50pm
It's a complete surprise that some people might spin the manner of disposal!
Permalink armchair Freud. 
May 2nd, 2011 3:54pm
There was no disposal, dumbass.
Permalink Idiot 
May 2nd, 2011 4:07pm
Idiot: "There was no disposal, dumbass."

Sure, sure.

Anyway, you have to be a bit more specific about which conspiracy you are trying to promote.

The fact that some people are complaining about the "burial at sea" doesn't prove there was a conspiracy (as you seem to be claiming).

If you want to sell a conspiracy, you are going to have to do better than that, fuckwit.
Permalink armchair Freud. 
May 2nd, 2011 4:25pm
"It's a conspiracy that 2+2=4" makes as much sense as your absurd attempts to paint those who ask "Where's the body mate" as conspiracy theorists.
Permalink Idiot 
May 2nd, 2011 4:39pm
Idiot: "US can't show body because we "buried it at sea" within 24 hrs "in accordance with islamic customs" (except it's not)"

This is STILL a stoopid statement. And it's the only thing I was commenting about.
Permalink armchair Freud. 
May 2nd, 2011 4:51pm
And how is it a conspiracy? It's not.

> "Preparations for at-sea burial began at 1:10 a.m. EST and were completed at 2 a.m. EST," the official said. "Traditional procedures for Islamic burial were followed."
Permalink Idiot 
May 2nd, 2011 5:27pm
Idiot: "And how is it a conspiracy? It's not."

You aren't making any sense.

If Osama wasn't "killed yesterday", wouldn't saying he was be a conspiracy of some sort?

> "Preparations for at-sea burial began at 1:10 a.m. EST and were completed at 2 a.m. EST," the official said. "Traditional procedures for Islamic burial were followed."

If you are claiming (who can tell!!) that he they mean he was buried in dirt, then, if he was buried at sea, then he wasn't buried in dirt.

What the fuck are you talking about?
Permalink armchair Freud. 
May 2nd, 2011 5:52pm
Noting obvious bullshit isn't conspiracy talk. It's common sense.
Permalink Idiot 
May 2nd, 2011 7:01pm
Where can I get my tinfoil hat?
Permalink less is more 
May 2nd, 2011 8:27pm
"the guy isn't likely to know anything about anything contemporary in the terrorist world ... "

what planet are you on, df?
Permalink eek 
May 3rd, 2011 8:29am
What has Osama done after Sept 11? How much of his terrorist network associated with him, do you think, given that he was worldwide the #1 most wanted man, with virtually zero mobility, maintaining a tiny group of cohorts to reduce the risk that one would sell him out.

His actions over the past almost 10 years have likely been limited to trying to survive and occasionally putting out a brief troll video.
Permalink df 
May 3rd, 2011 9:05am
You make it sound as if OBL had any involvement in 9/11.

You know more than the FBI? The FBI says they have no reason to believe he was responsible in any way. Has been on their site for years.
Permalink . 
May 3rd, 2011 9:32am
link, please
Permalink Some dude on the 'net 
May 3rd, 2011 10:08am
Why do I have to do your homework?


Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI responded, “The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Osama bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11.” Tomb continued, “Bin Laden has not been formally charged in connection to 9/11.” Asked to explain the process, Tomb responded, “The FBI gathers evidence. Once evidence is gathered, it is turned over to the Department of Justice. The Department of Justice then decides whether it has enough evidence to present to a federal grand jury. In the case of the 1998 United States Embassies being bombed, bin Laden has been formally indicted and charged by a grand jury. He has not been formally indicted and charged in connection with 9/11 because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11.”
Permalink Dr. Horrorwitz 
May 3rd, 2011 11:06am
df is a obedient, gullible little sheep.

He believes whatever his masters tell him to believe.

Keep paying your taxes and watching TV, Dennis!
Permalink Dr. Horrorwitz 
May 3rd, 2011 11:08am
Iuseful commentary for the sheep:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/roberts/roberts303.html
Permalink Dr. Horrorwitz 
May 3rd, 2011 11:10am
"FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11."

So bin Laden wasn't charged with anything, wasn't wanted in connection with anything, and will executed by an assassin team for the same reason the Go Daddy CEO shoots elephants.
Permalink Idiot 
May 3rd, 2011 11:30am
"The FBI says they have no reason to believe he was responsible in any way. Has been on their site for years."

Once again, link, please...as in a link to a page on the FBI Web site.
Permalink Some dude on the 'net 
May 3rd, 2011 11:34am
http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/wanted_terrorists/usama-bin-laden

http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2011/may/binladen_050211/binladen_050211

"The mastermind of the attacks on September 11, 2001 that killed thousands of innocent men, women, and children has been killed."
Permalink MobyDobie 
May 3rd, 2011 11:40am
"You make it sound as if OBL had any involvement in 9/11.

You know more than the FBI? The FBI says they have no reason to believe he was responsible in any way. Has been on their site for years."

You make it sound like you are a fuckwit.

How many reasons does the FBI need to want to capture somebody?

One would think that blowing up a US embassy is more than enough reason.
Permalink armchair Freud. 
May 3rd, 2011 12:28pm
Dr. Horrorwitz: "Iuseful commentary for the sheep:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/roberts/roberts303.html"

"lewrockwell"? Really?

You are a fuckwit too.
Permalink armchair Freud. 
May 3rd, 2011 12:46pm
I'm amazed that conspiracy theorists think that the lizard-people can trick virtually the whole world, including the public, the media, intelligence services, national governments & militaries into thinking OBL was involved in 9/11, but are somehow unable to get the FBI to update their website.
Permalink MobyDobie 
May 3rd, 2011 1:00pm
"We would have got away with it, if we could remember the damned FTP password" said GHB, King of the Lizard, and ruler of the NWO.
Permalink MobyDobie 
May 3rd, 2011 1:01pm
MobyDobie: "lizard-people can trick virtually the whole world, including the public, the media, intelligence services, national governments & militaries into thinking OBL was involved in 9/11, but are somehow unable to get the FBI to update their website."

Funny.

The stupid "conspiracy theorists" can't figure-out that the FBI didn't -need- to update their website.

We can be fairly certain that, at this point, that the US is certain that UBL is dead since it would look awfully silly if he issued another video. While we can't be certain when UBL died or was killed, none of the conspiracy idiots have indicated any good indication that what the US said was done is incorrect.

Idiot's implication that it was a conspiracy because we didn't knock on people's doors asking them if they wanted the body is very stupid indeed.
Permalink armchair Freud. 
May 3rd, 2011 1:55pm
Of course, it's possible that the US didn't actually dump the corpse into the sea but the conspiracy idiots haven't indicated why we should really care.
Permalink armchair Freud. 
May 3rd, 2011 1:56pm
> US is certain that UBL is dead since it would look awfully silly if he issued another video.

If he is in secure custody and will be killed later, that also assures he won't issue any more videos.

The idea that he had no useful intelligence is belied by the US military's own reports of the raid, which detail the large amount of intelligence data gathered from his residence. The idea that a kill not capture order was issued because he had no useful intelligence, is simply not consistent with the story.
Permalink MobyDobie 
May 3rd, 2011 2:03pm
MobyDobie: "If he is in secure custody and will be killed later, that also assures he won't issue any more videos."

Yes, that's possible. If that is the case, he's as good as dead.

It's certain that his body (dead or alive) isn't going to pop-up in some inconvenient place or way.

MobyDobie: "the US military's own reports of the raid,"

It's also possible that there's some marketing going on.
Permalink armchair Freud. 
May 3rd, 2011 2:08pm
Of course that's possible.

But there are 2 contradictory marketing stories.

It's common sense that you'd want to interrogate him if you could, before giving him a pill - yes he might know nothing, but why take a chance - so the story that they didn't want him alive anyway just doesn't ring true.
Permalink MobyDobie 
May 3rd, 2011 2:37pm
MobyDobie: "so the story that they didn't want him alive anyway just doesn't ring true."
It's not clear whose story that is.

It isn't implausible that UBL was shot whatever the plan was.
Permalink armchair Freud. 
May 3rd, 2011 2:47pm
The kill story seems to originate from unnamed US national security officials told Reuters reporter Mark Hosenball. You'd have to ask him who the exact officials are, but I doubt it was made up by Reuters. 

It's also emerged out today - according to the offical version of events - that while Obama's guards were armed, Obama was apparently unarmed when shot (and shot twice at close range), and hiding behind one of his wives ("using her as a human shield"). I think that confirms the official version of events is kill not capture.
Permalink MobyDobie 
May 3rd, 2011 3:30pm
s/Obama/Osama
Permalink Some dude on the 'net 
May 3rd, 2011 4:23pm
Ha didn't even notice that.
Permalink df 
May 3rd, 2011 4:24pm
I'm not confused between Obama/Osama.

One is a religious fanatic responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocents.

The other was killed in Pakistan yesterday. Allegedly.
Permalink MobyDobie 
May 3rd, 2011 4:28pm
> fbi.gov

> "Usama Bin Laden is wanted in connection with the August 7, 1998, bombings of the United States Embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya."

Nothing about 911 there.
Permalink Idiot 
May 3rd, 2011 4:41pm
“The FBI gathers evidence. Once evidence is gathered, it is turned over to the Department of Justice. The Department of Justice then decides whether it has enough evidence to present to a federal grand jury. In the case of the 1998 United States Embassies being bombed, bin Laden has been formally indicted and charged by a grand jury. He has not been formally indicted and charged in connection with 9/11 because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11.” -  Rex Tomb, FBI Director of Investigative Publicity

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1Pd_tCjSyc
Permalink Idiot 
May 3rd, 2011 4:45pm
Idiot: <reposting Dr. Horrorwitz>

How many reasons does the FBI need to want to capture somebody?

One would think that blowing up a US embassy is more than enough reason.

Man, you are an idiot.
Permalink armchair Freud. 
May 3rd, 2011 4:51pm
I was posting facts, not reposting H-wit.

The claim is he had to do with 911. That is false, according to the FBI until yesterday when they suddenly reversed direction and claimed bin laden was the mastermind of 911.
Permalink Idiot 
May 4th, 2011 12:02pm
Idiot: "The claim is he had to do with 911. That is false, according to the FBI until yesterday when they suddenly reversed direction and claimed bin laden was the mastermind of 911."

Fuckwit.

That UBL was accused of one crime doesn't mean they did not believe he didn't commit 9/11.

The FBI only needs ONE crime to justify capture and the embassy bombings are more than enough justification.
Permalink armchair Freud. 
May 4th, 2011 4:24pm
Idiot: "I was posting facts, not reposting H-wit."

You were posting the SAME quote that the other idiot Horrorwitz posted earlier.

I realize you are slow, but that IS reposting!

And it was as irrelevant then.
Permalink armchair Freud. 
May 4th, 2011 4:29pm
It's pathetic how much impact the media and just the general "word" of the administration have on people.  I mean I love this country and all but what we are doing is bullshit.  What gives us the right to just bomb around countries for the simple reason we're trying to kill this one guy?  Aren't we kind of terrorists for all the innocent Iraqi and Afghani men, women and children that we've killed?  We dignify our own agenda to the point we believe it's alright to not only sacrifice our own but also the innocent ones of other countries.  We throw democracy down everyone's throat and we can't even hold it up ourselves; what happened to 'for the people, by the people."  I learned that damn saying in first grade and I bet half the dumbasses in the House and Senate couldn't say it.

  We've come to the point where we take their word for everything.  They always have proof that someone is doing something to us, proof they can't show, but we should just "believe them." 

Like I said I love this country with all my heart, which is why I get so disgusted with the actions of those who lead this great nation.  We are supposed to be a role model nation for others who want to achieve peace, happiness, and opportunity.  Think about it, does America really want the "tired, poor, or huddled masses?"
Permalink Send private email Aaron Coffman 
May 4th, 2011 9:49pm
How hard would it be to think that it is plausable that he died of natural causes . He has been a sick sick man for most of his life and sick in heath ways for more than ten years. If he had renal failure, kidney failure, he would of needed medical care. The pictures would of been of his room not his helpers rooms.. Who probably did sleep on a floor. So the fact remains he was ill so what would happen if I told you he died recently on the out skirts of a small military base. Medically paid for by Americans. Then, as he died Obama had four or five meetings with his people as well as Paks goverment. To get Obama re-elected what if they gave him full permission to do what they want with the body in exchange for continued 3 billion a year to increase their military as well as all osamas money. Agreed so then.. Yes.. he was preserved until swat team could burst in and shoot him as the lung machine and such worked on dead Osama the swat shot him with orders the head was next it stopped. Then they agreed with Paks to get rid of ALL evidence an had a extreme burial at sea. Filming the house and shooting of others an their blood drips filmed and photos. What does Obama get out of it. He gets out of it a re election push and more favors to push his health care through. What does Paks get. 3 billion for life a year. What do muslims get. A burial at sea .. who washed his body. So... what happened to the other muslims that were there and shot. Well their blood was photoed. one body perhaps was pushed off as Osamas. What did the Paks army think as the training center as well as the active post think as the helicopters were flying around....
Permalink Isnt it enough to believe 
May 4th, 2011 10:32pm
President Obama isn't guaranteed re-election by OBL being killed. Remember that the first President Bush looked invincible after the first Gulf War - his approval ratings were either at, or close to, 90% - but ended up losing re-election to a certain governor from Arkansas.

I think the state of the US economy will ultimately determine if President Obama gets re-elected.
Permalink Some dude on the 'net 
May 5th, 2011 7:24am
Al Qaeda Confirms Bin Laden Death

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/07/world/asia/07qaeda.html?_r=1&hp
Permalink Some dude on the 'Net 
May 6th, 2011 12:06pm
Aaron Coffman: "It's pathetic how much impact the media and just the general "word" of the administration have on people.  I mean I love this country and all but what we are doing is bullshit. <rest of irrelevant rant snipped>"
??
So, what -does- this have to do with Bin Laden?
Permalink armchair Freud. 
May 8th, 2011 7:04pm
Isnt it enough to believe: "How hard would it be to think that it is plausable that he died of natural causes . He has been a sick sick man for most of his life and sick in heath ways for more than ten years. If he had renal failure, kidney failure, he would of needed medical care. <stupid conspiracy junk snipped.>"

Except there's no credible evidence that any of this was the case (at least, none which supports the degree you are suggesting).
Permalink armchair Freud. 
May 8th, 2011 7:07pm

This topic is archived. No further replies will be accepted.

Other topics: May, 2011 Other topics: May, 2011 Recent topics Recent topics