• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Bin Laden Kill

Pietro_Mercurios said:
Jerry_B said:
If Bin Laden isn't dead, it's strange that he's not sent out a message stating that. Ditto for his chain of command/followers.
That's still making the assumption that he was alive, any time in the last several years.

Again, if he had died years ago it's odd that his devotees haven't pointed out the falsehood of the US attack.
 
Jerry_B said:
Pietro_Mercurios said:
Jerry_B said:
If Bin Laden isn't dead, it's strange that he's not sent out a message stating that. Ditto for his chain of command/followers.
That's still making the assumption that he was alive, any time in the last several years.

Again, if he had died years ago it's odd that his devotees haven't pointed out the falsehood of the US attack.
Pure conjecture.

However, if he was already dead, then how would his alleged followers prove that the US had faked his recent assassination in the first place?
 
Pietro_Mercurios said:
ted_bloody_maul said:
... It's possible but is plausible?
The number of times I've asked that same question, these last ten years. Many, many times. Including about the reasons for the War in Iraq.

You and me both. However, that's neither here nor there - one lie required conspiracy or at least subterfuge on behalf of one group pursuing an agenda. This lie would require various people with conflicting agendas to agree over a sustained period of time even when the lie became a hindrance to one of those agendas.


Pietro_Mercurios said:
[Question:
What is the most recent really clear and authentic photo, or video, of Osama Bin Laden, that anyone can actually remember seeing? Not including alleged voice-overs, or audio tapes.

That's an unanswerable question since anyone can make allegations or question authenticity regardless of whether or not it's legitimate to do so. Some believe the video/audio tapes are Bin Laden, others don't. However, we'd still have to come back to the question of why Zawahiri or anyone else close enough to Bin Laden hasn't exposed the lie. I can't think of a plausible reason that doesn't require the extension of the conspiracy to a fantastical degree.
 
Pietro_Mercurios said:
Pure conjecture.

As is talk of a fake assassination.


Pietro_Mercurios said:
However, if he was already dead, then how would his alleged followers prove that the US had faked his recent assassination in the first place?

They wouldn't need to prove they'd faked his assassination, they would only need to verify his earlier death.
 
ted_bloody_maul said:
...

They wouldn't need to prove they'd faked his assassination, they would only need to verify his earlier death.
'Hey! You know how we've been threatening the West with the Wrath of Bin Laden, all these years? Well, it was all a big joke! We didn't really mean it.'
 
Pietro_Mercurios said:
ted_bloody_maul said:
...

They wouldn't need to prove they'd faked his assassination, they would only need to verify his earlier death.
'Hey! You know how we've been threatening the West with the Wrath of Bin Laden, all these years? Well, it was all a big joke! We didn't really mean it.'

'Hey! You know how we've been saying the West is corrupt, run by tyrants who kill and lie at will and who will stop short of nothing to wage war against Allah and his people? Well, we were right all along!'

It would be a failure of intelligence not to see the potential here.
 
I'm with Ted on this one, if it wasn't Bin Laden they killed then proving he had died earlier would be massively damaging to the US. It'd damage their credibility even further and almost certainly wreck Obama's chances of re-election.

Simplest explanation is that it was Osama who they shot and killed in Pakistan.
 
hokum6 said:
...

Simplest explanation is that it was Osama who they shot and killed in Pakistan.
Prove it.

I can't conjecture about "why Zawahiri or anyone else close enough to Bin Laden hasn't exposed the lie." I've no idea what might be in it for them. All the rest from either side, is just so much unprovable conjecture and unfounded claims. Bin Laden was a useful figurehead, frontman, or bogeyman, sitting in his super-secret mountain cave hideout in Tora Bora, or watching porn in his super-secret compound in Pakistan.

However, I have seen what appear to be authentic photos and footage of Bin Laden, just nothing recent. I would simply like to know, what is the most recent photo, or video footage that anyone can actually remember seeing, that looks like it might actually be real and not faked?

:confused:
 
Pietro_Mercurios said:
hokum6 said:
...

Simplest explanation is that it was Osama who they shot and killed in Pakistan.
Prove it.

Can you think of a simpler explanation?

Pietro_Mercurios said:
[I can't conjecture about "why Zawahiri or anyone else close enough to Bin Laden hasn't exposed the lie." I've no idea what might be in it for them. All the rest from either side, is just so much unprovable conjecture and unfounded claims. Bin Laden was a useful figurehead, frontman, or bogeyman, sitting in his super-secret mountain cave hideout in Tora Bora, or watching porn in his super-secret compound in Pakistan.

But a completely useless bogeyman for his acolytes when dead. Unless, of course, his alleged death was demonstrably false in which case he's the ultimate martyr who exposes the truth of western corruption.

And you do yourself a disservice by suggesting that you can't conjecture - you go on to do exactly that in the next statement. And this is hardly an isolated example.

Pietro_Mercurios said:
However, I have seen what appear to be authentic photos and footage of Bin Laden, just nothing recent. I would simply like to know what is the most recent photo, or video footage that anyone can actually remember seeing? :confused:

Why?
 
Well, who here is making the extraordinary claims?
 
You are.
I can't believe that the fact that Al Qaeda didn't reveal that OBL was already dead is still seen by some as definitive proof that he was alive and well (and who knows if Zawahiri is still alive ?).

That being said, there is still no real evidence that OBL was killed on early May (I don't count official assertions as real evidence).
 
Analis said:
You are.
I can't believe that the fact that Al Qaeda didn't reveal that OBL was already dead is still seen by some as definitive proof that he was alive and well (and who knows if Zawahiri is still alive ?).

I don't think it's definitive proof. I don't know anyone who does. I do believe, however, that's it's more likely that they would make the most of a propaganda gift which would be more potent than anything they've come up with themselves so far. If they did provide proof I'd probably be promoting your argument about a fictionalised war on terror and the events of 9/11. But they haven't and so I'm not.


Analis said:
That being said, there is still no real evidence that OBL was killed on early May (I don't count official assertions as real evidence).

So what do you count as real evidence? Do you or somebody you can personally vouch for have to verify it? If not then you're going to have rely on 'official' assertions either way.
 
Pietro_Mercurios said:
Explanations without proof would simply be conjecture.

'Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.'

A simpler explanation. Not an extraordinary one. And not proof, just a theory. I'm more than happy to listen to your conjecture on this occasion. I know you're something of a shrinking violet when it comes to offering an opinion but it would be really nice to hear one.
 
Analis said:

Everything we have - news reports, photos, video, government statements - says Bin Laden was alive until killed in Pakistan. If you're going to claim otherwise then you are the one making the extraordinary claim. Maybe that's not much to go on, but it's what we have, and I would assume that if you're saying it wasn't Bin Laden you've got some factual basis to make that claim.
 
So someone has to explain the efficacy of Al Q not claiming that OBL had died earlier, when the news that the US were saying that they had killed him was released in May.
 
Pietro_Mercurios said:
Pure conjecture.

Eh? Surely we're all using a bit of conjecture within this thread? Hence the discussion :roll: So you may be stating the bleeding obvious there ;)
 
Just prove that he actually was assassinated in May. Couldn't be simpler.
 
Prove that he wasn't ;) All I've chosen to do thus far is wonder why certain parties haven't exploited the situation.

After all, if we take the official account as the true account and use that as a starting basis for the argument, what do we have that supports or disproves it?
 
Well, this is all going round in circles...
 
I'm not asking for proof or claiming proof, I'm asking for a simpler explanation.

why would a simpler explanantion be the truth Ted ?

your still getting gogged down with , why it makes sense for AQ to pretend he was alive and why the US wanted him alive longer than he was , and why they wanted him dead when they did, and how AQ would be happy with it that way.
 
looping effortlessly in the whys, and buts

try looking at some facts that can be looked at from our point of view, what data do we have access too ?

stop sumizing and look at what we can see
 
It's quite straightforward.

I'm not claiming that the US administration has given definitive proof. They have made an extraordinary claim. You can argue that the onus of proof is on them. My point is that there a great many people out there in whose interest it would be to disprove the American claims of Bin Laden's death.

If Obama claimed that unemployment had been slashed, that violent crime was non-existent in America or that the Tea Party were being funded by the KKK then of course people would ask him for proof of his claims. However, it would be bizzare to think that those who stood to lose from his assertions being accepted would not actively seek to disprove his claims regardless of what he did or didn't offer by way of explanation. In short, they would produce their own evidence to counter his claims both to defend themselves and to attack him.

I'm not claiming that a simpler explanation is the truth or proof of anything. Merely that it it the most likely version. None of us know What Really Goes On, especially if it does happen to be as subverted as many would believe. We can only make a best guess based on what seems most plausible.

Some have countered that the American version of what happened with Bin Laden's assassination is not the simplest explanation. If they believe that to be true why can they not offer a simpler explanation? Not definitive proof or even a likely explanation just a simpler one? Given that it seems to animate those making the claim it simply comes across as evasion and a desire to believe something regardless of any consideration of facts and possibilities that they're not prepared to do so. When they're unwilling to even specify what could convince them this impression is reinforced.
 
I agree with Ted. Either OBL was killed by the US, or Al Q seem very slow to pronounce anything to the contrary - even if it's to say that OBL died several years ago. The fact that neither of things have happened would have to be explained by those that doubt the official version of things.

I say this as we have no actual conclusive proof that OBL is still alive or was killed in May. The only way we could possibly tell what has happened is from reactions - as I've outlined above.
 
hokum6 said:
Everything we have - news reports, photos, video, government statements - says Bin Laden was alive until killed in Pakistan.

News reports ? But they are merely repeating what official sources said. When journalists really investigated and found interesting stories, they were dropped.
The video of the old man watching TV ? This man could be OBL, but why didn't they provide a video of him completely and unambiguously visible ? And his neighbours disputed that it was him.
And about government statements, they have a general lack of credibility, as they have produced a number of conflicting versions, with no apparent reason. And the motive for the diposal of the body doesn't stand up to scrutiny, and has been dismissed by various Muslim authorities.

The rest of the evidence similarly doesn't tally.
If visual witnesses confirmed the presence of gunshots and of an helicopter, their accounts contradicted the official version (notably about the possibility that a body was retrieved). The three so-called OBL's relatives gave three completely different accounts. And we don't know what they've become ; wouldn't it be interesting for a journalist to try to interview them ?
Similarly, OBL's mansion has been described as devoid of any radio, phone or electronic connection with the world, but then there was a TV, a phone etc...

ted_bloody_maul said:
So what do you count as real evidence?

Body, and clear, uncontrovertible pictures. Like those from the tiny cameras worn by the Navy Seals commandos who took part in the operation.
Ah, but last news are that these cameras never existed after all. Despite CBS News national security correspondent David Martin had cited details that had been alledegly retrieved from the examination of their recordings :
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/05/ ... bsCarousel

Their existence had been admitted by the media and the public, with an implicit admission from the authorities. But now, again, a wide part of the official story has changed.

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2011/08/17-1
« The SEALs were not wearing helmet cams, contrary to a widely cited report by CBS »


ted_bloody_maul said:
I don't think it's definitive proof. I don't know anyone who does. I do believe, however, that's it's more likely that they would make the most of a propaganda gift which would be more potent than anything they've come up with themselves so far. If they did provide proof I'd probably be promoting your argument about a fictionalised war on terror and the events of 9/11. But they haven't and so I'm not.

Jerry_B said:
So someone has to explain the efficacy of Al Q not claiming that OBL had died earlier, when the news that the US were saying that they had killed him was released in May.

I had given reasons that I personnally found convincing for that. I will just briefly sum them up here.
That somebody has information that would be heavily detrimental for their ennemies, and doesn't try to use it for their benefit, is it absurd ? Your opinion relies on this presupposition, but there are many historical precedents for that - we had already covered this part. The reason is that the revelation of a shared secret is detrimental to both sides.

I can imagine that an Al Qaida leader, as an idealized version of a fanatical Muslim drawn by his nihilistic dream of martyrdom for Allah the Almighty, would try to reveal that OBL had been dead for many years. But I can also foresee the consequences for his fight. Loss of credibility among potential recruits, loss of leadership, loss of trust from fighters in their leaders... Their already decaying army would be reduced to an even smaller core of the most fanatical, which wouldn't last long.

And I don't give much importance to the arguments that jihadists are motivated only by a pure irrational ideal of martyrdom. They're human beings, and like with all human beings, prospect of victory, trust in their leaders or fashion play an important role. A decade ago, jihadists could find many more recruits. Now that they are losing everywhere, that promises from AQ leaders haven't come to fruition, their numbers have drastically dwindled. Seems that the prospect of becoming a martyr for the cause of Allah is not so appealing by itself after all.
AQ leaders, if they are still alive at all, understand that. So, unless they want to scuttle what is left of their army, they probably wouldn't reveal that OBL had been dead for years.


For those who know this movie, I have recently re-watched Farenheit 451. The scene of 'Montag's' execution, towards the end, made me uneasy. Because I have no reason to believe that we are not facing a similar situation.
 
Back
Top