It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by burntheships
The announcement was May 1st. At no point does it give a date that says "today" or "yesterday" we killed Osama.
Originally posted by forall2see
Originally posted by burntheships[/i
No...whoever is in charge of this, The White House, The CIA, they have certainly managed to make a one unprecedented mess. And they have used The Media as a tool, as I see it!
My question is....could this all be intentional?
Have they made it so confusing on purpose...obfuscate the matter as a grand tactic?
I am curious to hear from everyone about this.
That's exactly what I have been thinking. If you take all of the mis-leading and/or confusing stories...
I really feel as though they want us to talk about everything as it changes in order to keep our eyes away from the ball. The ol' slight of hand technique.
Originally posted by ~Lucidity
The media (loosely defined) is 1/3 of the problem here. So it's funny to see them scramble. The other 2/3s are, of course, the originators of the information and us.
None of the three are doing that wonderful a job here. Too fast, too furious, too many assumptions, too many "official" sources, too much extrapolation, interpretation, and embellishment, too many snapshot moments that billions of people have different copies of, so things gets jumbled up, misinterpreted, miscommunicated, and basically mucked up.
"[Bin Laden] was engaged in a firefight with those that entered the area of the house he was in," said terror czar John Brennan. Similarly, Obama said that “after a firefight, they killed Osama bin Laden and took custody of his body.” The next day, however, the White House spokesman admitted bin Laden “was not armed." Trying to save face and justify the killing of an unarmed man, the spokesman added, without elaborating, that “resistance does not require a firearm."http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=24669
Originally posted by ~Lucidity
Another example: Who started the rumor that he used his wife as a shield as he fired? Did the White House release that tidbit or did someone embellish? If the White House said it. It's a contradiction, albeit one that might also have an explanation or not. If embellished, where was it embellished, by whom when and why, and how many people out there will spread this as fact from now till all eternity because that was their snapshot?
The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over
“Think of the press as a great keyboard on which the government can play.
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
Originally posted by Michelle129th
But I'll tell you something...and let me know if any of you find this happening in your life, people that I know that are so ANTI conspiracy and total sheeple are actually starting to question this...the same people that usually laugh or roll their eyes when I talk about stories I read on this site are actually having a "hmmm" moment.
As it is, we must take it as more evidence that the US government has unlimited belief in the gullibility of Americans www.lewrockwell.com...
"[His blood] will remain, with permission from Allah, the Almighty, a curse that chases the Americans and their agents, and goes after them inside and outside their countries," it warned.
"Before the sheikh passed from this world and before he could share with the Islamic nation in its joys over its revolutions in the face of the oppressors, he recorded a voice recording of congratulations and advice which we will publish soon, God willing."
Originally posted by scottlpool2003
Thought I'd throw this in the works, I noticed a potential slip-up by BBC news regarding the possible confirmation of Bin Laden's death by Al Qaeda
"[His blood] will remain, with permission from Allah, the Almighty, a curse that chases the Americans and their agents, and goes after them inside and outside their countries," it warned.
Source: www.bbc.co.uk...
Notice the word "Allah"
"Before the sheikh passed from this world and before he could share with the Islamic nation in its joys over its revolutions in the face of the oppressors, he recorded a voice recording of congratulations and advice which we will publish soon, God willing."
Source: Source: www.bbc.co.uk...
Hmmmm, God Willing? It was put in " therefore it is a direct quote. Why would 'Al Qaeda' reference God?