Osama Buried at Sea...within 24 hours. Really?

reply to post by eurotrash


Some impersonator got shot, that is my THEORY. I have decided to withdraw my million dollar reward for the body of Bin Ladin. Traffiking in body parts is just wrong. I bet Osama's head is sitting on a mantle with next to Pancho Villa's.

Hello ats,

I cant help but notice the similarity of events or the connection between the "non releasing" of the dead body picture and the "burial at the sea" to an incident regarding the supposedly death of one of the leaders of the Abu sayaff in the Philippines.

Story says, at the height of the prolonged hostage crisis, CIA operatives worked with a elite yet unauthorized group of the Philippine armed forces to track and capture Abu Sabaya, the flamboyant leader of the group.

They tracked Abu sabaya using the CIA hi tech gadgetry and a chase and a firefight ensued at high seas in which it ended badly for Abu sabaya as stated being killed and drowned. The body was not recovered though.
My beef was, all of the world wants this egomaniacal kidnapper neutralized or taken to court. Yet, they settled for "just take our word for it".

Wouldn't it nice to have that trophy of a "mythical beast" hanging in our wall. So we could tell all our children not to fear anymore

History channel ran a program about it a year ago. Gracia Burham was one the hostages.

peace to all

Like they would leave such a valuable body just laying around for anybody to pick up. That would be stupid. If they did bury him at sea, they would have to stand guard on the body forever.

Originally posted by earthdude
Like they would leave such a valuable body just laying around for anybody to pick up. That would be stupid. If they did bury him at sea, they would have to stand guard on the body forever.

Yep, and its not uncommon for them to washup on beaches either. That'd do a lot of good. Meh, does seem kind of slack to bury him at sea though, but he was wrapped up, could be anyone or anything couldn't it, who knows.

I would really like to know who cleansed the body and how.

I'm a former sailor and I can tell you that I'm imagining how they would've done it and it's not good... not good at all.

I would think that the proper way to have done it would be to have someone of the Muslim faith do it... but that would've required forethought that I'm starting to think didn't happen.

I don't believe the washing and sea-burial was part of the plan. If it was, then that would mean they expected a dead body.

I wish that they would release that video and pictures.

Originally posted by CharlieRay
I would really like to know who cleansed the body and how.

I'm a former sailor and I can tell you that I'm imagining how they would've done it and it's not good... not good at all.

I would think that the proper way to have done it would be to have someone of the Muslim faith do it... but that would've required forethought that I'm starting to think didn't happen.

I don't believe the washing and sea-burial was part of the plan. If it was, then that would mean they expected a dead body.

I wish that they would release that video and pictures.

Well, of course "they expected a dead body". Burial at sea was part of the plan, not an ad hoc change to it. The American government's explanation that they wanted to respect Islamic tradition about quick burial but there was no country willing to receive Osama's body is B.S. I have seen no evidence that Osama was killed. Just hearsay and circumstantial evidence. What better way of stopping the world ever finding out that you killed one of the Osama lookalikes used by the CIA to make the occasional audio tape for them than burying the body at sea?

reply to post by 000063


I withdraw.

It appears his wife and daughter, who were there, have confirmed it was him.

If there was any hint of a conspiracy, or that it didnt go how the President said it did, these people would be the first to say. It appears this is the reasonable verification I was looking for.

Not that it proves anything one way or another, but I for one am satisfied.

Originally posted by areyouserious2010
reply to post by 000063

 

I withdraw.

It appears his wife and daughter, who were there, have confirmed it was him.

If there was any hint of a conspiracy, or that it didnt go how the President said it did, these people would be the first to say. It appears this is the reasonable verification I was looking for.

Not that it proves anything one way or another, but I for one am satisfied.

There could be many explanations for that. Ive not seen his supposed wife or daughter any where. Are those two like the daughter of that diplomat who claimed she saw Iraqi soldiers take babies out of incubators and throw them on the ground in Kuwait, during the Gulf war? A story that was later proven to be a 100% lie but was run by all our medias, nonetheless.

Why didn't they try to take bin Laden into custody? They never intended to in the first place.

If al-Qaeda says he's dead, and Osama's wife and daughter say he's dead, I believe them. I didn't believe the official account at first, but I think we can say with 99% certainty that bin Laden is dead.

With this, the only other plausible theory is that bin Laden was captured alive by the SEALs, declared dead so that no one would ask otherwise, and taken to a secret prison so that he could be privately tried/interrogated without the US having to deal with the justice system.

So Bin Laden is just chilling with Megatron?? ((forget Transformers 2 that never happened for me lol))

I think they Mafia style sank his body, concrete boots and say hello to Jimmy Hoffa. This is the biggest mystery so far, why ditch the body?? Maybe Obama did it because he is a secret Muslim and wanted his "brother" to die a Martyr.

I dunno, commence the research!!

reply to post by SusieX


Like I said, it does not prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. The body proves that.

A reasonable person would be able to draw the conclusion that if the United States made the story up entirely, his wife, daughter and Al Qaeda would be the first to yell foul. I have not heard any accusations of that whatsoever from any of those people.

If it comes out that their confirmation was completely falsified and reasonable proof of such is provided then I will reconsider. But at this point, I am making a judgement on the evidence provided.

Originally posted by SusieX

Originally posted by areyouserious2010
reply to post by 000063

 

I withdraw.

It appears his wife and daughter, who were there, have confirmed it was him.

If there was any hint of a conspiracy, or that it didnt go how the President said it did, these people would be the first to say. It appears this is the reasonable verification I was looking for.

Not that it proves anything one way or another, but I for one am satisfied.

There could be many explanations for that. Ive not seen his supposed wife or daughter any where. Are those two like the daughter of that diplomat who claimed she saw Iraqi soldiers take babies out of incubators and throw them on the ground in Kuwait, during the Gulf war? A story that was later proven to be a 100% lie but was run by all our medias, nonetheless.

Speculation. No proof.

Originally posted by areyouserious2010
reply to post by SusieX

 

Like I said, it does not prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. The body proves that.

A reasonable person would be able to draw the conclusion that if the United States made the story up entirely, his wife, daughter and Al Qaeda would be the first to yell foul. I have not heard any accusations of that whatsoever from any of those people.

If it comes out that their confirmation was completely falsified and reasonable proof of such is provided then I will reconsider. But at this point, I am making a judgement on the evidence provided.

Yes but a reasonable person would not base their judgements on hearsay either, which is all we have at this point.

No concrete facts whatsoever.

When judgeing wether there is any validity to "facts" being put forward by the administration and CORPORATE media, I like to examine the "facts" being presented as if they were being submitted in a court of law.

Al Qaeda did not publicly confirm Bin Laden's death last weekend. There is no video or audio from any of the people we know to belong to the organization. What we do have are anonymous comments posted on a Jihadi website known to be frequented by terrorists.

Now in a court of law, would this be accepted as proof that someone died?

What stops me from joining the same website and getting an Arabic friend to post that Bin Laden died in my basement nine years ago and is now peacefully sleeping under the bed of roses in my backyard?

Would it make the statement true just because it appears on a Jihadi website??

As for the wife and daughter, where are they? The corporate media is reporting statements supposedly coming from them but no actual video footage of them saying any of it. No images of them either, not recently taken or ever.

In court, would you accept third party statements (which is what the media are reporting) as fact or hearsay?

I have seen some photos of a passport that is claimed to belong to the wife but considering how easily a passport can be faked, is that enough proof to base the death of someone on, especially when there is no body to speak of and the only people who claim there was a death, also claim the body was dumped in the middle of the sea? Convenient to also murder three witnesses that were on site...

All you have here is hearsay and no actual concrete facts to prove Bin Laden was there and died last week.

Ive followed Mid East politics for years and am not so easily dupped by the lies and deceit of the American Administration, regardless of who's in office.

I see it all the time.

Originally posted by SusieX

Originally posted by areyouserious2010
reply to post by SusieX

 

Like I said, it does not prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. The body proves that.

A reasonable person would be able to draw the conclusion that if the United States made the story up entirely, his wife, daughter and Al Qaeda would be the first to yell foul. I have not heard any accusations of that whatsoever from any of those people.

If it comes out that their confirmation was completely falsified and reasonable proof of such is provided then I will reconsider. But at this point, I am making a judgement on the evidence provided.

Yes but a reasonable person would not base their judgements on hearsay either, which is all we have at this point.

No concrete facts whatsoever.

Yes we do. The wife and daughter said he was dead, according to Pakistan. Al Qaeda says he was dead, and they'd have all the reason in the world to show the US was full of liars.

That's witness testimony, not hearsay.

When judgeing wether there is any validity to "facts" being put forward by the administration and CORPORATE media, I like to examine the "facts" being presented as if they were being submitted in a court of law.

Al Qaeda did not publicly confirm Bin Laden's death last weekend. There is no video or audio from any of the people we know to belong to the organization. What we do have are anonymous comments posted on a Jihadi website known to be frequented by terrorists.

Now in a court of law, would this be accepted as proof that someone died?

No, it would be evidence. Not proof.

What stops me from joining the same website and getting an Arabic friend to post that Bin Laden died in my basement nine years ago and is now peacefully sleeping under the bed of roses in my backyard?

I assume someone's checking IPs. I also assume that AQ would laugh at you, on account of knowing where bin Laden was until just before the attack.

Would it make the statement true just because it appears on a Jihadi website??

It would make it credible, at least.

As for the wife and daughter, where are they? The corporate media is reporting statements supposedly coming from them but no actual video footage of them saying any of it. No images of them either, not recently taken or ever.

Yes, and?

In court, would you accept third party statements (which is what the media are reporting) as fact or hearsay?

In court, there would be subpoenas. You're artifically holding something that isn't a trial to the standards of one.

I have seen some photos of a passport that is claimed to belong to the wife but considering how easily a passport can be faked, is that enough proof to base the death of someone on, especially when there is no body to speak of and the only people who claim there was a death, also claim the body was dumped in the middle of the sea? Convenient to also murder three witnesses that were on site...

Provide evidence that he was killed maliciously or not at all.

All you have here is hearsay and no actual concrete facts to prove Bin Laden was there and died last week.

All you have is Argument from Incredulity and no evidence that he wasn't. If the military DNA tests were enough to prove Saddam wasn't a double, as well as identifying other bad guys, why the artificially high standard of proof for OBL?

Ive followed Mid East politics for years and am not so easily dupped by the lies and deceit of the American Administration, regardless of who's in office.

I see it all the time.

edit on 8-5-2011 by SusieX because: syntax

Which could alternately be interpreted as "blind doubt".

the entire newscast coverage was just an obvious farce. especially on today the 10-yr commemoration and the idea some guy behind so much destruction was just shot and tossed off a boat, hahah laughable bsss seriously?



even the 'experts' are making it up as they go alone.

The search for Osama's body has been called off. Millions were spent, but no body. I think somone was lying about dumping him at sea.