Will Osama's capture end the 9/11 theories?

FIrst we are told its Bin Laden, then we are told its Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (might have buthered his name here), now that Bin Laden is dead, we are told it was indeed Bin Laden. If you have somebody in for questioning and he keeps changing his story, what would you think? Also I wonder what will become of Khalid now.

Originally posted by descartes90
does this prove he is guilty?

what do you think?

No it won't have any difference in the least, because...

a) al Qaida is already lining up a replacement for Bin Laden. I forget his name but he's that doctor from Egypt, who is the supposed number 2 in the Al Qiada network. He's supposed to be even more of a threat than Bin Laden because Bin Laden was a religious dreamer who fantasized the entire Arab world would rally to his cause after the 9/11 attack, but the Egyptian doctor guy is a real world realist who knows his bunch are just a bunch of hooligans unless they can overthrow a gov't somewhere and become an actual political state. There's going to be a big shift in al Qaida's tactics from here on in.

...as well as...

b) the conspiracy people have always based their outlook on abject paranoia rather than any real review of the facts, and the scaryer and more sinister the accusation, the better. Let's face it, these "lasers from outer space" and "no planes" accusations are only remotely believabe if you want to believe it's true. In their minds, they've already concocted some half baked excuse on how killing Bin Laden is yet another "de facto proof" that there's some sinister secret plot to take over the world.

It's a great morale booster, to be sure, and it's a razor sharp message to Al Qaida that they can run but they can't hide, but the war of terrorism will continue and the conspiracy people will continue to make up lunatic sounding excuses on how the world is secretly being controlled by the Jews, secret cults of Satan worshipping numerologists, or whatever.

reply to post by Cassius666


No, the story has ALWAYS been that Osama was in charge of Al Qaeda and that Khaled Sheikh Mohammed was his operations planner. Changing testimony....good grief...

Originally posted by walltofloor

It's very convienient that he was killed before capture dont you think??

It doesnt prove anything really, it just proves that the US has been hunting him and they got him.



Although it seems strange he was killed in the fight, why not try everything possible to capture him alive? The news reports have been saying ' there was a firefight and after he was killed and they took possesion of his body''

Why not try to capture him alive and put him to trial?

"Convenient", my dog's butt. If Osama Bin Laden was even half of the uber-fanatic, death-to-the-infidels rabid dog mentality attributed to him, there'd be no way he would have willingly been captured alive by US forces. He would have, and probably did, shoot it out with US forces himself. They'd only find out it was him after the fact.

You forget that he isn't some tea sipping aristocrat worrying whether there's enough apricot preserves for his morning meal. He's also a war veteran from fighting with the Mujahadeen against the Soviets. He almost certainly saw what happened to Saddam Hussein so he'd go out of his way not to be captured, which is exactly what Hitler swore after seeing what happened to Mussolini.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


It has been reported this morning that for some reason, they actually did demand his surrender. I am not sure why they did that, double tap..grab the remains...and exfil...

I doubt OBL's may1st death announcement will have any effect on what people think happened on 911.
Folks should be asking themselves:

How did bin laden/AQ make NORAD stand down on 911?

For if NORAD was operational,the attacks would never have taken place IMO.

Someone effectivley allowed the attacks to suceed,someone with the power to make NORAD stand down...
Hmmm,now who would have that power?

Not OBL,thats for sure.

reply to post by Silcone Synapse


The problem with your opinion is that...NORAD did not stand down that day. It reacted as it was trained to do....when it is intercepting a threat that is coming from OUTSIDE the United States.

I think you believe lies very easily. You are a blind sheeple. And don't know the guidelines for making a thread at ATS.

No FnS. Your thread sucks.

Thats not how it works. Any presented evidence, or the lack thereof, proves that he is guilty.

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

It has been reported this morning that for some reason, they actually did demand his surrender. I am not sure why they did that, double tap..grab the remains...and exfil...

Becuase it's always easier to demand a surrender than storm a heavily fortified and defended barricade. The SEALS are a hard core bunch of hombres but those guys still look forward to getting back to their base alive too.

If a surrender really was issued, it only confirms that OBL was of a character that wouldn't have ever willingly been taken alive. He had to have known the humiliation and indignation that Saddam Hussein went through at the hands of his captors, and I daresay I wouldn't want my picture being displayed all over the Internet of me in my wearing tighty whiteys in a prison cell either.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by descartes90
does this prove he is guilty?

what do you think?

b) the conspiracy people have always based their outlook on abject paranoia rather than any real review of the facts, and the scaryer and more sinister the accusation, the better. Let's face it, these "lasers from outer space" and "no planes" accusations are only remotely believabe if you want to believe it's true.

What board have you been reading? Architects=conspiracy people? Pilots=conspiracy people? Firefighters=conspiracy people? It wasnt our fault mossad got caught where they dont belong either. The only people I saw talking about lasers from outer space on here was you over and over and over on any random topic, copy and paste.

reply to post by Cassius666

Architects=conspiracy people?

Yes.

Pilots=conspiracy people?

Yes.

Firefighters=conspiracy people?

Yes.

Now mind you, being an architect or an engineer or a firefighter does not mean that you are involved in the conspiracy cult, however, being supposedly professional does not make one immune from the kind of mental dysfunction that allows a person to embrace these kind of fantasies.

It wasnt our fault mossad got caught where they dont belong either.

They weren't.

The only people I saw talking about lasers from outer space on here was you over and over and over on any random topic, copy and paste.

Wake up, the person that composed that particular fantasy actually sued the US government for doing it.

Originally posted by Silcone Synapse
I doubt OBL's may1st death announcement will have any effect on what people think happened on 911.
Folks should be asking themselves:

How did bin laden/AQ make NORAD stand down on 911?

No, folks should be asking themselves why they keep repeating this "NORAD stand down" fable despite the fact it's been thoroughly been proven to be bunk being passed around by those damned fool conspiracy web sites?

Conspiracy people simply do not want to face the fact their sinister conspiracy claims are drivel, so they're cling to any and every goofball accusation that comes along that helps keep them alive. Watch, I predict that within the next few weeks, the conspiracy people will be insisting that the gov't is covering up the details of the OBL assassination by refusing to release photos of the dead OBL, and when the photos ARE released (because let's face it, something like that will be leaked one way or the other) they're turn around and insist the photos are faked. If they're making up "NORAD stand down" claims to sucker people to believe their conspriacy claims then how can they not make up "photos of the dead OBL are faked" accusations?

Who here says I'm wrong, raise your hands.

It isnt a "tale". It has been confirmed by people who were around Chenney that day. The authority to shoot down airliners was taken from base commanders months before the attack and reinstated afterwards.

I see the same reasoning over and over by the deniers. If daddy tells you santa doesnt exist he must be part of a conspiracy cult. Unless santa himself tells you he doesnt exist, he probably does exist.

reply to post by Cassius666


Base commanders NEVER had the authority to shoot down airliners. That is a bald faced lie sir.

Originally posted by Cassius666
It isnt a "tale". It has been confirmed by people who were around Chenney that day. The authority to shoot down airliners was taken from base commanders months before the attack and reinstated afterwards.

I see the same reasoning over and over by the deniers. If daddy tells you santa doesnt exist he must be part of a conspiracy cult. Unless santa himself tells you he doesnt exist, he probably does exist.

edit on 2-5-2011 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)

Really, you think that United States airbase commanders ever had the authority to shoot down civilian aircraft? C'mon, where are you getting this crap from? It doesn't even make a lick of sense.

Originally posted by Cassius666
What board have you been reading? Architects=conspiracy people? Pilots=conspiracy people? Firefighters=conspiracy people? It wasnt our fault mossad got caught where they dont belong either. The only people I saw talking about lasers from outer space on here was you over and over and over on any random topic, copy and paste.

Since Richard Gage is pushing "secret controlled demolitions" claims, he is necessarily accusing the New York Port Authority, the New York Police Dept., the New York Fire Dept., NIST, FEMA, workers at ground zero, and hordes of other people directly and indirectly involved with the events of that day of either being in collusion to mass murder, or a coverup of mass murder, regardless of whether Gage is specifically saying it, or not because they are universially reporting things which disagree with his claims. The same goes for that "Pilots for 9/11 truth" guy, as everyone who was physically there at the Pentagon is saying the exact opposite of what his paper statistics perport. So, yes, by definition they are necessarily conspiracy theorists regardless of whether you find the fact offensive or not.

I said it before and I'll say it again- if you conspiracy theorists were to ever actually hold your own ludicrous claims up to the exact same of intensive scrutiny and critical analysis that you do the 9/11 commission report, you wouldn't be conspiracy theorists for very long.

Originally posted by Cassius666
It isnt a "tale". It has been confirmed by people who were around Chenney that day. The authority to shoot down airliners was taken from base commanders months before the attack and reinstated afterwards.

You are lying and we both know it. You're referring to the Mineta's "does the order still stand" statement the conspiracy theorists continuously misquote to keep their conspiracy claims alive. I shouldn't need to tell you that "orders still stand" is NOT the same thing as "stand down order". You're seeing that all on your own.

Besides, Mineta himself stated what the order as that stll stood in the exact same testimony that the conspiracy peopel get the "orders still stand misquote from- he said he subsequently found out it was referring to a shoot down order. Plus, he confirms that interceptors definitely were scrambled. Here's the exact testimony you're quote mining:

MR. MINETA: No, I was not. I was made aware of it during the time that the airplane coming into the Pentagon. There was a young man who had come in and said to the vice president, "The plane is 50 miles out. The plane is 30 miles out." And when it got down to, "The plane is 10 miles out," the young man also said to the vice president, "Do the orders still stand?" And the vice president turned and whipped his neck around and said, "Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?" Well, at the time I didn't know what all that meant. And --

MR. HAMILTON: The flight you're referring to is the --

MR. MINETA: The flight that came into the Pentagon.

MR. HAMILTON: The Pentagon, yeah.

MR. MINETA: And so I was not aware that that discussion had already taken place. But in listening to the conversation between the young man and the vice president, then at the time I didn't really recognize the significance of that.

And then later I heard of the fact that the airplanes had been scrambled from Langley to come up to DC, but those planes were still about 10 minutes away. And so then, at the time we heard about the airplane that went into Pennsylvania, then I thought, "Oh, my God, did we shoot it down?" And then we had to, with the vice president, go through the Pentagon to check that out.

MR. HAMILTON: Let me see if I understand. The plane that was headed toward the Pentagon and was some miles away, there was an order to shoot that plane down.

MR. MINETA: Well, I don't know that specifically, but I do know that the airplanes were scrambled from Langley or from Norfolk, the Norfolk area. But I did not know about the orders specifically other than listening to that other conversation.

MR. HAMILTON: But there very clearly was an order to shoot commercial aircraft down.

MR. MINETA: Subsequently I found that out.

This has been shown here time and time again and yet the conspiracy people still can't let the "stand down" internet rumor go. This is why I say Osama Bin Laden's death won't have an impact on the conspiracy mongoring- despite all the facts being available at their fingertips the conspiracy mongors will still side in with whatever absurd thing they read on some damned fool conspiracy website or another. All you've done in your protests is to show that I'm right.

Well somebody had to give some kind of instructions, so that an object could travel for 40+ minutes to the pentagon without being intercepted.

Not at all.

If anything it just brings forth more speculation.
In MSM alone there are so many conflicts, some say he was killed days ago but Obama said it just happened.
Some are saying we knew where he was for months before they killed him.

I don't understand WHY we killed him, they say he has admitted guilt to the events that happened.
If they knew where he was for months before going after him why didn't they try to capture him?
I heard on one new station he was going to festivals, and pretty much living a normal life in the eyes of the public around him.

Now, if what they claim is true and the people didn't know who he was why would it be so hard to capture him?
They watched him for months, so they say.

The only reason I feel it would have been dangerous or impossible to capture him and bring him here alive would be if the Pakistanis were bigger sympathizers then they have been portrayed as, and they feared they wouldn't have made it out of there alive with Osama alive leaving him to once again get away.

Maybe they feared repercussions but honestly if there are going to be any wont there be any either way?
What was so important that he be KILLED then exposed of so quickly ? and not let those who he hurt get justice of seeing him get what he deserves and go on trial then put to death?

Did they fear there would be people on US soil who would do drastic things to set him free?

It just doesn't match up, to me at least and I would have been more able to accept everything if it wasn't carried out in the way it was and he was brought here and put on trial.
But no they kill him, match the DNA to his sisters DNA which they obtained from his sisters brain..really keep her brain of all things to keep (weird) and dump him in the ocean?

Or did the man/actions behind the face of Osama even exist to begin with?

I just don't even know.