Osama Bin Laden Is Dead

[Jonfairway]

my view

osama died sometime around end of 2001 and mid 2002

it benefits obama to have him dead now

aq cannot produce an alive osama now can they, and who would beleive them if they said he had died in 2002, but we needed him alive so we went along with the charade the US were spouting.

in any case he's dead which is a good thing anyway.

that said they can use this latest death LOL to raise the terror stakes again and get recruiting some more.

and the war goes on, with a bit more vigor on their part.

 

[Jonfairway]

maybe this will jog your memory

same bloke ?

 

[Quake42]

Nevertheless, I'm unhappy to see reports of crowds chanting 'USA' outside the White House. Recall how enraged many were by Palestinian celebrations in the wake of 9-11. There is a difference: the death of many civilians against the death of a terrorist, but displays of triumphalism merely ensure the perpetuation of the cycle of hatred. If American political leaders truly believe they inhabit higher moral ground than their enemy, they should do their best to show that their society can behave better than them.

It's a very magnanimous viewpoint but I suspect a minority one. The gulf between crowds cheering the deaths of thousands of innocent people on 11/9/01 and the scenes from last night/this morning - which were more of relief than anything else - is vast. I think it's okay to be quite pleased with this result.

The worry of course is the risk of revenge terrorist attacks - here's hoping that the authorities keep a close eye on our homegrown headbangers over the next few weeks.

 

[ted_bloody_maul]

It concerns only the USA, but the other consequence would be that they "would never again be trusted for the foreseeable future".

AQ don't need to be trusted again. Their priority is the destruction of the Zionist Crusader alliance and its removal from influence in the middle east. They would acheive that. It's not like they're going to stand for election afterwards.

There, I disagree. They have a need to be straight with their followers. There, all what they would achieve would be to expose themselves as people who can't be trusted.

Their followers are prepared to overlook mass murder. You reckon a fib which actually helps acheive their goals is going to bother them?

And do you seriously believe that if they said "Hey, you know, OBL died years ago", anybody would believe them ?

Well, apparently a load of conspiracy theorists already do. In any case they may well have proof.

At first, jihadists are already the most unwelcomed people in the western media. Now that in addition, they would be self-proclaimed liars, nobody would pay the slightest attention to what they would claim. Everybody would laugh, "you know, they say OBL was dead all along, and these morons couldn't even tell us ! How silly of them !" Nobody would look at their evidence, and the whole thing would be forgotten the following day.

They don't need people in the west to trust them, merely that we distrust our own governments and more importantly that Muslims the world over distrust our governments. And if the whole sorry conspiracy theory industry is anything to go by then there will be plenty of people worldwide prepared to repeat ad nauseum their claims (not to mention the fact that many still believe in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion's authenticity).

If OBL died long ago, they should have told it then. Now, it's no use anymore.

Sorry but to believe that you'd have to believe that we already live in a totalitarian state where public opinion isn't even an afterthought. Oh, wait a minute...

 

[Pietro_Mercurios]

Lest we forget:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...iban-offer-to-surrender-bin-laden-631436.html

Bush rejects Taliban offer to surrender bin Laden

Second week of bombing begins;
Media visits village hit by missile

Independent online. By Andrew Buncombe in Washington. 15 October 2001

After a week of debilitating strikes at targets across Afghanistan, the Taliban repeated an offer to hand over Osama bin Laden, only to be rejected by President Bush.

After a week of debilitating strikes at targets across Afghanistan, the Taliban repeated an offer to hand over Osama bin Laden, only to be rejected by President Bush.

The offer yesterday from Haji Abdul Kabir, the Taliban's deputy prime minister, to surrender Mr bin Laden if America would halt its bombing and provide evidence against the Saudi-born dissident was not new but it suggested the Taliban are increasingly weary of the air strikes, which have crippled much of their military and communications assets.

The move came as the Taliban granted foreign journalists unprecedented access to the interior for the first time. Reporters were escorted to the village of Karam in southern Afghanistan, where the Taliban said up to 200 civilians were killed in an American bombardment last Wednesday.

The reporters saw clear evidence that many civilians had been killed in the attack, though they could not confirm the number of deaths. "I ask America not to kill us," pleaded Hussain Khan, who said he had lost four children in the raid. In the rubble of one house, the remains of an arm stuck out from beneath a pile of bricks. A leg had been uncovered near by.

Another old man said: "We are poor people, don't hit us. We have nothing to do with Osama bin Laden. We are innocent people." Washington has not commented on the bombardment.

Mr Kabir said: "If America were to step back from the current policy, then we could negotiate." Mr bin Laden could be handed over to a third country for trial, he said. "We could discuss which third country."

But as American warplanes entered the second week of the bombing campaign, Washington rejected the Taliban offer out of hand. "When I said no negotiations I meant no negotiations," Mr Bush said. "We know he's guilty. Turn him over. There's no need to discuss innocence or guilt."

...

It seems so long ago, now. Thousands of lifetimes ago.

 

[Quake42]

The offer yesterday from Haji Abdul Kabir, the Taliban's deputy prime minister, to surrender Mr bin Laden if America would halt its bombing and provide evidence against the Saudi-born dissident was not new...

Mr Kabir said: "If America were to step back from the current policy, then we could negotiate." Mr bin Laden could be handed over to a third country for trial, he said. "We could discuss which third country."

From memory this was the issue: the Taliban was not prepared to hand over Bin Laden to the US and there was no way that the Americans would have settled for extradition to a third country.

 

[ted_bloody_maul]

my view

osama died sometime around end of 2001 and mid 2002

it benefits obama to have him dead now

It would have benefited Bush to have him dead at various times. The 2004 election in particular. It will always benefit whoever is in office to have him dead/captured. This particular point in time is not an especially good one for Obama. Had he done it a week ago you'd be saying it was helfpul because it took the birther movement out of the headlines.

aq cannot produce an alive osama now can they, and who would beleive them if they said he had died in 2002, but we needed him alive so we went along with the charade the US were spouting.

Who would believe them if they said he had died in 2002? I'll give you a clue - he's sitting at your computer reading this repsonse right now.

Who is the 'we' here, by the way? :?

in any case he's dead which is a good thing anyway.

Is it? If the whole thing's a sham then what difference does it make? It merely means that a group of people you distrust are moving on to the next stage of their nefarious plot.

that said they can use this latest death LOL to raise the terror stakes again and get recruiting some more.

That's contrary to everything that you and people like you have been saying for the best part of the last decade. It's intellectual fraud to try and have it both ways, frankly.

and the war goes on, with a bit more vigor on their part.

Except there's no real sign of that, is there?

 

[Jonfairway]

Ted said

merely that we distrust our own governments

never a truer word spoken

 

[McAvennie]

my view

osama died sometime around end of 2001 and mid 2002

it benefits obama to have him dead now

aq cannot produce an alive osama now can they, and who would beleive them if they said he had died in 2002, but we needed him alive so we went along with the charade the US were spouting.

in any case he's dead which is a good thing anyway.

that said they can use this latest death LOL to raise the terror stakes again and get recruiting some more.

and the war goes on, with a bit more vigor on their part.

That is an interesting theory, if you subscribe to the inside job logic. Will have to wait and see what happens, but bringing 'the fear' back into everyday lives will certainly happen to an extent. Also the 10th anniversary of 9/11 approaching, the death of Osama bringing international terror back to the agenda and making another attack seem more likely... if you buy into that sort of thing.

However, if there is not an inside job and OBL really did die sometime in the last 10 years and his death was kept quiet by AQ, surely the chance to humiliate the US is too great for them not to expose their white lie. If we believe that happened he would surely have been given a respectful burial and one or two of his closest comrades would know where. Exhuming the body to provide DNA in order to show the US administration as liars would be arguably a bigger and more devastating attack than a sequel to 9/11. The fact that nothing along these lines seems forthcoming from AQ makes me think, personally, that this was not the case.

Furthermore, in truth, I find the idea of OBL living in relative luxury in a nice area of Pakistan - with the knowledge of Pakistani authorities - more believable than the hermit in a cave theory.

 

[Jonfairway]

Except there's no real sign of that, is there?

not yet Ted

not yet

 

[ted_bloody_maul]

Lest we forget:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...iban-offer-to-surrender-bin-laden-631436.html

Bush rejects Taliban offer to surrender bin Laden

Second week of bombing begins;
Media visits village hit by missile

Independent online. By Andrew Buncombe in Washington. 15 October 2001

After a week of debilitating strikes at targets across Afghanistan, the Taliban repeated an offer to hand over Osama bin Laden, only to be rejected by President Bush.

After a week of debilitating strikes at targets across Afghanistan, the Taliban repeated an offer to hand over Osama bin Laden, only to be rejected by President Bush.

The offer yesterday from Haji Abdul Kabir, the Taliban's deputy prime minister, to surrender Mr bin Laden if America would halt its bombing and provide evidence against the Saudi-born dissident was not new but it suggested the Taliban are increasingly weary of the air strikes, which have crippled much of their military and communications assets.

The move came as the Taliban granted foreign journalists unprecedented access to the interior for the first time. Reporters were escorted to the village of Karam in southern Afghanistan, where the Taliban said up to 200 civilians were killed in an American bombardment last Wednesday.

The reporters saw clear evidence that many civilians had been killed in the attack, though they could not confirm the number of deaths. "I ask America not to kill us," pleaded Hussain Khan, who said he had lost four children in the raid. In the rubble of one house, the remains of an arm stuck out from beneath a pile of bricks. A leg had been uncovered near by.

Another old man said: "We are poor people, don't hit us. We have nothing to do with Osama bin Laden. We are innocent people." Washington has not commented on the bombardment.

Mr Kabir said: "If America were to step back from the current policy, then we could negotiate." Mr bin Laden could be handed over to a third country for trial, he said. "We could discuss which third country."

But as American warplanes entered the second week of the bombing campaign, Washington rejected the Taliban offer out of hand. "When I said no negotiations I meant no negotiations," Mr Bush said. "We know he's guilty. Turn him over. There's no need to discuss innocence or guilt."

...

It seems so long ago, now. Thousands of lifetimes ago.

We could perhaps embolden the parts where the conditions were attached. They could have handed him over before the war started but they chose not to. The offer didn't change.

 

[ted_bloody_maul]

Ted said

merely that we distrust our own governments

never a truer word spoken

Well, I'm glad you've finally come round to agreeing with my point. Perhaps the question wasn't so stupid after all, eh?

 

[Jonfairway]

However, if there is not an inside job and OBL really did die sometime in the last 10 years and his death was kept quiet by AQ, surely the chance to humiliate the US is too great for them not to expose their white lie. If we believe that happened he would surely have been given a respectful burial and one or two of his closest comrades would know where. Exhuming the body to provide DNA in order to show the US administration as liars would be arguably a bigger and more devastating attack than a sequel to 9/11. The fact that nothing along these lines seems forthcoming from AQ makes me think, personally, that this was not the case.

but that brings us back to, AQ having the ability to prove the real dead Osama via special DNA testing , and making the USA look bad.

Do they have that kind of equipment in the hills around afghanistan ?
would you, for that matter would anyone ( except me TED ) believe them ?
Do they have DNA matter to compare it too ? if they did produce the DNA matter and give it to them that can do such testing, who is going to say they are independant ?

The yarn is so long and ingrained now, the truth is not going to be easy to promote ( if it is the truth of course )

any comments on the two Osama's ?

 

[Jonfairway]

Well, I'm glad you've finally come round to agreeing with my point. Perhaps the question wasn't so stupid after all, eh?

only agree with one sentence taken out of context Ted.

I think you argue for arguing sake, having said that, its fun to argue with you

 

[Yithian]

It's a very magnanimous viewpoint but I suspect a minority one. The gulf between crowds cheering the deaths of thousands of innocent people on 11/9/01 and the scenes from last night/this morning - which were more of relief than anything else - is vast. I think it's okay to be quite pleased with this result.

The worry of course is the risk of revenge terrorist attacks - here's hoping that the authorities keep a close eye on our homegrown headbangers over the next few weeks.

I'm not saying I don't understand the reaction, it's just that I can't imagine it helping.
The whole situation saddens me. I can't see a future without reprisal attacks happening.

 

[ted_bloody_maul]

Well, I'm glad you've finally come round to agreeing with my point. Perhaps the question wasn't so stupid after all, eh?

only agree with one sentence taken out of context Ted.

I think you argue for arguing sake, having said that, its fun to argue with you

You might think that but I will almost certainly comment. You are, nonetheless, reinforcing my point that it is of benefit for Islamists to create distrust between western governments and populations of all kinds. Why not at least sow the seed of doubt by taking us to his grave?

 

[McAvennie]

but that brings us back to, AQ having the ability to prove the real dead Osama via special DNA testing , and making the USA look bad.

I am sure they don't have DNA kits in the Afghan foothills, but for the chance to expose US govment lies I would think inviting Al-Jazeera to come and film the exhumation and bring DNA experts along would be worth the hassle. Where they would get access to recognised OBL DNA I don't know. I don't know who has access to that. Maybe they themselves recorded OBL's burial, although I doubt they would have put on film any record of what they wanted kept quiet.

any comments on the two Osama's ?

He looks a bit fatter, but then I can look a bit chubbier if I have had too many pies one month.

For what it is worth I believed he had died naturally in about 2004/05 - whenever it was he stopped making personal videos and suddenly went over to voice recordings. I don't know how much today's events change that theory for me - what is incontravenable proof these days anyway? What would we need to see to believe it that was unquestionable?

The only thing that makes me think he is dead now and hasn't been up to recently is the risk the US would be taking in having AQ provide proof that he had died a long time previous and proving them to be liars.

Either he has just been offed, or the US had him rubbed a while back and have kept it quiet. Had he died naturally, or died in AQ arms they would not have complete control over everything surrounding his death/burial and revealing it now would be far too grand a risk.

 

[Jonfairway]

You might think that but I will almost certainly comment. You are, nonetheless, reinforcing my point that it is of benefit for Islamists to create distrust between western governments and populations of all kinds. Why not at least sow the seed of doubt by taking us to his grave?

AQ would take the press to his grave, dig it up, give them DNA samples to take back to ???? where ever to test with DNA from his sister, etc.

how many people are you trying to get to doubt Ted ?

and even if it did happen and they proved he died in 2002 or 2003, what do you think the general public would do with this information ?

The US lied to the world ? and ?

are we all going to become Islam followers ?

 

[Analis]

@ ted_bloody_maul :
You partially answered your own question : what would be important to them would not be so the support of western public, than the thrust of their followers. Now that their numbers are constantly dwindling (if jihadist groups are still more than marginal sects at all), it would be crucial.
And yes, a fib would reckon even many people who are prepared to mass murder. The SS were prepared to comit genocide, because they were prepared to obey their leaders ; their determination would certainly have been detered had they learned that they were lying to them.

Although on a second guess, I'm a little confused : then what was OBL's point to release all those videos, where he shouted down Western governments, bankers and industrialists who were oppressing masses ? Didn't he ask us on many occasions to distrust our own states ? Doesn't this suppose that he should retain at least a minimum of credibility ?

And I know of no 'conspiracy theorist' who believes OBL is dead because jihadists told them !

Umm, I think people's opinion of Al Qaeda turned a long time ago. Not sure that them coming out and admitting that OBL was in fact already dead five years ago and they just kept it quiet is going to be the straw Donkey's spinal column fears.

Granted, I was still undecided on them after 9/11, Madrid, 7/7 etc... but finding out they were fibbers would be too much for my sensibilities, but I am pretty sure I'd be in the minority...

[sarcastic mode on/] When I think that I disliked them before 11 september 2001, when you had to wait for so long. :cry: [sarcastic mode off]

EDIT: I may have misread your comments though, cannot tell if you mean the US are liars or Al-Qaeda. If you mean the US ignore me, if you mean AQ, feel the sarcastic wrath

You had not misread, so go on with the sarcastic wrath !
But I think the real reason for no OBL close follower to spill the bloods is that none of them are left. It has probably been true from many years. Al Qaeda as such doesn't exist anymore, what exists now is a conglomerate of loosely tied jihadists groups who fancy themselves as parts of the legendary "Al Qaeda", because it is gratifying for their ego. They probably don't know what the true whereabouts of OBL and Zawahiri are.

 

[ted_bloody_maul]

AQ would take the press to his grave, dig it up, give them DNA samples to take back to ???? where ever to test with DNA from his sister, etc.

If by "the press" you mean one individual with trusted journalistic credentials then why not?

how many people are you trying to get to doubt Ted ?

Do you want a number for this? :?

and even if it did happen and they proved he died in 2002 or 2003, what do you think the general public would do with this information ?

Well, it would make even a sheep-like follower of US propaganda like myself think twice.

The US lied to the world ? and ?

are we all going to become Islam followers ?

Do we need to in order to help AQ acheive its short term goals?

 

[ted_bloody_maul]

@ ted_bloody_maul :
You partially answered your own question : what would be important to them would not be so the support of western public, than the thrust of their followers.

I say both are important. If AQ could influence elections in European countries or the US they most certainly would. It's claimed that they did just that in Spain (although I would quibble with that to some extent). I can't see that doing the former in this case would make them untrustworthy in the eyes of a public forced to endure western hegemony and misrule. In any case it is not for themselves that they wish to create such conditions as much as it is for their ideology.

Now that their numbers are constantly dwindling (if jihadist groups are still more than marginal sects at all), it would be crucial.
And yes, a fib would reckon even many people who are prepared to mass murder. The SS were prepared to comit genocide, because they were prepared to obey their leaders ; their determination would certainly have been detered had they learned that they were lying to them.

Sorry but that's simply contentious and untestable. However, the principle of deception serving a greater good is not exactly an alien one to most peoples, particularly during war. The point is that the AQ lie would be on behalf of Muslims, not against them.

Although on a second guess, I'm a little confused : then what was OBL's point to release all those videos, where he shouted down Western governments, bankers and industrialists who were oppressing masses ? Didn't he ask us on many occasions to distrust our own states ? Doesn't this suppose that he shuld retain at least a minimum of credibility ?

Not really sure what you're getting at here. OBL's aims in those speeches would be the same as AQ's in debunking the date of his death. I can't see why this should be a point of confusing.

@ And I know of no 'conspiracy theorist' who believes OBL is dead because jihadists told them !

I know of nobody who's claimed that they do. Don't really see your point here.

 

[GNC]

Does the US government not believe in trials anymore?

 

[Yithian]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/ ... H220110502

Soldiers were under orders to 'kill not capture". If he hadn't resisted, he'd still have been shot in the back of the head.

edit: post I was replying to has disappeared! Conspiracy!

 

[Analis]

We could perhaps embolden the parts where the conditions were attached. They could have handed him over before the war started but they chose not to. The offer didn't change.

The excuse of the existence of "conditions" is irrelevant. The war was illegal. The burden of proof lied on the Bush government, it was to them to meet these conditions. What happened was a war of aggression, pure and simple.

Bush said "We know he's guilty", but he didn't provide any evidence. Nor has he since. Nine years later, the reason for the agresion should be clear : he didn't provide any evidence because he hadn't any.

It would have benefited Bush to have him dead at various times. The 2004 election in particular. It will always benefit whoever is in office to have him dead/captured.

I think that having him as a boogeyman was more important to them. The perpetual war on terror was their goal.

This particular point in time is not an especially good one for Obama.
......

that said they can use this latest death LOL to raise the terror stakes again and get recruiting some more.

That's contrary to everything that you and people like you have been saying for the best part of the last decade. It's intellectual fraud to try and have it both ways, frankly.

For once, I will agree (partially) with you. Obama's strategy is not the same. In my opinion, he wished to end the OBL myth, so that no-one would use him again in the future.
Plus during his campaign, he had accused Bush not to try to catch OBL. Hint, in my opinion, that he knew that the republicans could not counter him by arresting or killing him.

and the war goes on, with a bit more vigor on their part.

Except there's no real sign of that, is there?

But there, I admit that now, he will have more support for the war in Afghanistan.

 

[GNC]

Soldiers were under orders to 'kill not capture". If he hadn't resisted, he'd still have been shot in the back of the head.

Geez, what were tasers invented for?!

 

[ted_bloody_maul]

The excuse of the existence of "conditions" is irrelevant. The war was illegal. The burden of proof lied on the Bush government, it was to them to meet these conditions. What happened was a war of aggression, pure and simple.

Illegal according to whom? The UN? Russia? Iran?

I think that having him as a boogeyman was more important to them. The perpetual war on terror was their goal.

-----------------------

For once, I will agree (partially) with you. Obama's strategy is not the same. In my opinion, he wished to end the OBL myth, so that no-one would use him again in the future.
Plus during his campaign, he had accused Bush not to try to catch OBL. Hint, in my opinion, that he knew that the republicans could not counter him by arresting or killing him.


But there, I admit that now, he will have more support for the war in Afghanistan.

Why? I suspect most people would argue otherwise. In any case Obama, who apparently doesn't want to go down the same road of perpetual war on terror, has now just bought himself greater support for extending it in Afghanistan.

It seems that no matter what happens, literally no matter what happens, it is fated to produce the same outcomes in the conspiracy bonanza.

 

[Moooksta]

I'd like to see Qsama fight back, he was allegedly suffering from kidney failure back in 2001.

Quite a few article about him being dead...

CNN report "Pakistan's Musharraf: Bin Laden probably dead from 18/01/02

BBC NEWS "Bin Laden 'probably' dead" 18/07/02

TIME MAGAZINE "When Will Obama Give Up the Bin Laden Ghost Hunt?" 18/11/08

AMERICAN SPECTATOR "Osama bin Elvis" 03/09

GLOBALIZATION RESEARCH "Osama Bin Laden: Dead or Alive? " 9/11/09

 

[Mythopoeika]

All I can say about this is "Ding-Dong! The Witch Is Dead!"...to quote L Frank Baum.

 

[ramonmercado]

All I can say about this is "Ding-Dong! The Witch Is Dead!"...to quote L Frank Baum.

Yes and they will still sing songs about Osama 100 yrs from now. A martyr is born.

 

[ramonmercado]

Just to clarify, I'm glad hes dead but he really wasn't leading anything for a long time (even if he was alive).