I'd like to discuss this theory rationally
POSTED BY: AnthonyT
UPDATED: Wednesday, May 11, 2011 17:48
VIEWED: 17233
PAGE 1 of 9
Hello,
The conspiracy theory saturation of the day is that Osama Bin Laden died ~ a decade ago, and we have waited till now to announce his death under invented circumstances.
I am not inherently averse to this possibility, just as I am not averse to the possibility that we attacked ourselves on 9/11. However, actually believing in this as though it were truth (the Earth revolves around the sun, Electricity makes my light-bulb glow) requires quite a bit more than armchair musings.
My question is, does anyone have any compelling evidence of this, or is it mere speculation and selective interpretation of information that could have multiple significances and explanations?
Thank you,
--Anthony
_______________________________________________
“If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all”
Jacob Hornberger
“Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right.”
Mahatma Gandhi
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I think for sure we don't know everything that happened on 9-11 despite the 900 plus page commission report. I know our government is incompetent, and so it's not entirely unreasonable that they could have just dropped the ball on the hijackers and the attack, and the fact that they're incompetent is good reason to believe they simply couldn't have pulled it off even if they wanted to.
However, they also have stated in writing that they intend to use false flag terror attacks on American citizens to whip up public support for various policies, and official stories for some of the other terrorist attacks on US soil break down on closer examination. I remain a skeptic for all official stories, though I don't fully commit to the unofficial ones either.
As for Osama Bin Laden... Hmm. There's a reason I haven't been commenting on this, and that's because I'm still not quite sure what to think.
I know he's been on dialysis, and I expected him to die a while ago, and I also saw the news reports that he was dead.
On the other hand, the only source for the old news report was someone in Pakistan, who might have had good reason to have lied. Really, I don't quite believe this recent report OR the old report.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Fox News, We Report, You Decide
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,41576,00.html
What Really happened gets strange DDOS attack hours *before* Obama's bombshell
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/osama_dead.php
http://www.a-w-i-p.com/years-of-deceit-us-openly-accepts-bin-la.html
I can't find the link now, I thought I had it bookmarked The 2001 Haaretz story contained the line: Israeli intelligence on the ground has confirmed [the death of Osama Bin Laden of natural causes]
The story surfaced 12-26-01, but some sources say he had died on 12-13. He had been ill for some time, and even prior to the terrorist attacks of 9.11.01 he was spending most of his time in hospitals for myriad health problems, including diabetes and kidney failure, probably related to opium abuse which is very common in Afghanistan.
That's a reasonable starting point, I think. I would only add a couple of thoughts:
1) Osama has not released a credible audio or video that has been verified to be him by anyone but the US and possibly one or two of her stalwart allies.
2) Nothing was released by Osama for some time after his death, and when it was, it was fairly inconsistent with anything he had said or written before.
3) Everything Osama said after his death seems calculated to support US calls for action, and not his own muslim solidarity agenda.
4) The continued existence of Osama after his death is an issue which only serves US interests.
The hunt for Osama Bin Laden was used by Bush in 2002 to support an invasion of Afghanistan, by Cheney in 2003 to support the invasion of Iraq and by Obama in 2009 to support the invasion of Pakistan.
It seems a living man might take action to counter the use of his name for attacks against multiple countries where he was allegedly hiding.
Many people made the argument "How can you not find a 6'6" arab in central asia, where everyone else is somewhat shorter, and either persian or indo-aryan. I think the answer to that question is "Because he's not walking around, he's buried under the ground."
Re: his involvement in the attacks of 9.11, he denied it almost immediately, which is an odd thing to do because he had everything to gain by claiming credit, which is what terrorists usually do. Terrorists don't deny attacks. That would completely defeat the whole purpose of terrorism.
Given his deteriorating health over his last year, it would be hard to credit that he masterminded an attack that circumvented the entire US defense structure. From where? A hospital in Paris? Or one in Dubai?
One piece of natural skepticism we should have about anything being propagated extensively throughout the information network is "who or what does this information serve?"
As for my own speculation on the attacks? I am virtually certain that it was done by placing explosives in the buildings, and the airplanes were done for spectacle. Nothing about the physics make sense otherwise.
As for whodunnit? I think that's a separate question. I would say "could be terrorists" but my suspicion would be that it was at least in part inside job. My reason for this suspicion is that I think US military defenses are essentially unbreachable, and the attacker would have had to have access to the buildings ahead of time. Ergo, they would have at least one inside man, and probably more. It could be entirely inside, but I would be a lot less sure of any guess I made on "who" did it than I would be on "how it was done."
That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Byte, I wish I had the Israeli intelligence report on hand. I have it somewhere. It's not my understanding that it was a lone Pakistani report without verification. If it were, I would have been more skeptical of it, since they would have a vested interest in his death before anyone decided to use his life as a reason to invade Pakistan.
It's worth noting that the specific regional Afghan-Pakistan border is a line on the map not locally recognized. The people on what we would call the Pakistani side are Afghans, and consider themselves as such, which is why they are a problem for Pakistan.
A realistic border for Pakistan would be the Indus River. There are virtually no ethnic Pakistanis living west of the Indus River, and virtually no Afghans Pashtun or Persians living east of the Indus River. It's really the traditional border between Peria and India, two empires currently in a state of disarray.
That may change after we lose this war, but the realistic river border hasn't moved in centuries, if not millenia.
ETA, Anthony, Byte,
It's nice to see there are some people who think. I come here to gather information, not to disseminate it, so I don't spend a lot of time constructing arguments, most of what I say is my collected understanding based on what I've gathered, so it's hard for me to present that as a winning argument.
Frem and John are both in the information disseminating business, and by all means, nitpick and cherry pick away, but when they do way in, which they will, consider their information on its own merits, regardless of what you think of their conclusions. I humbly suggest doing what I do with it, which is to take each information point that looks interesting and go digging for myself to see how much truth there is in it.
I also have to add that someone on the mission to capture him sent me a message many years ago saying: 'Everyone here is convinced that he is already dead, including the brass, and this mission was a recruiting trick which has me stuck in this war' - a war he was in for 5 years. That's anecdotal, but it did give me early skepticism, and so I took note of all mentions of "the hunt of bin laden" "the need to get him" and "where he was hiding" as well as everything bin laden "said" with interest, skepticism and a grain of salt, and I found a consistent propagandistic pattern to all of the above.
That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hey Anthony,
I have a real problem believing that the events described this week were faked. I have a real problem accepting that some completely invisible body is running the world so expertly and so decisively that they elect to release this information right now and folks like President Obama just say, "Yes sir," lying to the entire world and history itself. I have a real problem believing that they control such things so completely and can't control the raft of embarrassments that plague this and every other Presidency. On the one hand they're all-powerful gods of politics and on the other they can't seem to tie their own shoes.
As far as I can see, it all boils down to what sources one believes to be "credible," and from what I've seen, "credibility" is in the whimsical eye of the beholder.
From what I've learned of covert government agencies they're all about bafflement and deniability--that's how they cover things up and get what they want done. This raid on OBL's compound and its aftermath is just too damn simple and unambiguous to smell like CIA bullshit.
It virtually HANDS the next election to Obama. That's the only "big lie" purpose I see this news serving. Thing is, Obama's victory in the upcoming election was pretty assured before all this. So, these all powerful gods of politics see fit to waste this momentous news on a cause that's virtually won in the first place? No, in that case, they continue to hold that ace until it is *needed*.
The reasoning on this conspiracy just screams back-engineering--"I can't trust them, so they must be up to something!" Historically, I see no evidence for the kind of absolute control over reality by any mortal agency that the current theory implies.
HKCavalier
Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
HK,
We've been posting that he was dead for years. But this operation smells exactly like CIA BS, it's too pat, and there's no body, we suddenly lucked out?
For "Why do it?" You're right it helps Obama's re-election chances, but it does two other things:
If OBL were in Pakistan, and he did capture him there, he can use this as a justification for invading, which is otherwise just a blatantly treasonous act or a war crime.
The other is its a massive distraction that has totally kicked Turkey and Egypt switching sides to side with Iran off the front page.
Obama admitted twice during the campaign that he had lied, so don't think he's above lying. The question is whether he's using this to get us out of the war, or justify war, and we won't know that for a couple weeks. Depends on how he uses the information. To me, whether or not the information is true is really less relevant in the long run. I'm pretty sure it's not, but I'm waiting to what end Obama uses it.
That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hello,
So essentially we have a bunch of people saying he was 'probably' dead before, and a bunch of people saying they killed him now.
We have the fact that he was 'probably' very ill, and 'probably' would have died from his illnesses before he could be killed.
I can embrace skepticism. I wonder what causes people to vehemently declare this conspiracy theory as truth? Where is the skepticism? It seems one should be skeptical round-robbin in 360 degrees.
--Anthony
_______________________________________________
“If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all”
Jacob Hornberger
“Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right.”
Mahatma Gandhi
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
My doubts are simple: there was no independent confirmation of OBL's death before the alleged burial at sea. Lack of photographs doesn't bother me, I understand jerks would've used them to make him a martyr, I'm not a ghoul who wants to see a dead body, and that can be photoshopped anyway. But a second credible source to close the issue without question for us conspiracy minded folks would've been in the best interests of those in charge. There's simply no evidence or support given for the report of his death apart from say-so and the quick burial makes me suspicious.
I lack two pieces of information. The first is the Israeli confirmation from 2001 DT mentioned. The second is, why now? My belief in either theory is suspended until I have more information. The proposed scenarios (War with Pakistan, War with Iran) however could happen even if the current story is true.
HKCavalier is right in one way, of course this has nothing to do with the elections. The powers that be and their lobbyists, analysts, agenda factions and so on don't give three straws about elections. If a wanted policy is to be affected, it doesn't matter who is in office or even what they've said their platform is. All that matters is propaganda, and any proposal will eventually be twisted into the form they want when legislation is passed.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I'm with Cavalier. I don't put that much faith in people that they can be nearly as clever as some seem to think. And I don't see anything being done to allow us to invade Pakistan, it simply isn't going to happen.
I agree about the skepticism; it's always made me shake my head that conspiracy theorists seem so totally convinced of their theories, and don't show any skepticism at all about THEM. Which is I guess what makes conspiracy theorists; they distrust the news and the government(s) so completely that nothing can ever be what we're told, so the conspiracy makes more sense to them. Somebody out there must be gonna get us. I don't get it, since logically there should be skepticism of both "theories", but all I ever see is people (and I don't mean just here) providing all kinds of "reasons" why their theory is absolutely correct, with no questioning of the theory once they embrace it.
I knew the minute I heard about bin Laden's death that this would start up; I guess to a degree it's about that loss of innocence we were talking about. Once you start distrusting the government/news completely, I guess the instinct is to believe something else is true on about everything. At least maybe it will occupy the birthers for a while and get them off that shit!
I see NO reason to have kept his death a secret; I think Bush would have adored to crow to the world that he'd "got 'im"...why wait and let a (shudder) DEMOCRAT take the credit? They already had us scared enough to take chunks out of our civil liberties; they could have gone right on doing so by using al Qaeda, since they're disseparate groups acting independently and have been doing so for a long time. Doesn't make sense. To me anyway.
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off 
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I don't know how much more obvious I can get with "I don't quite believe either story."
But, that said, policy doesn't change with either Democrats or Republicans in office, therefore it doesn't matter at all who reports OBL's death.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME