Mr-Paul Posted May 4, 2011 Posted May 4, 2011 If you see how gruseome those pics that I posted are, apparently the pics of Osama himself are just as gruesome/even worse and they fear that they would provoke a massive reaction/be used in islamist propoganda. I'm curious to see them (even though I'm squeamish), but understand their decision to be honest.
EEVILMURRAY Posted May 4, 2011 Posted May 4, 2011 That last picture is pretty brutal. I couldn't help but think I've seen worse on CSI.
Platty Posted May 4, 2011 Author Posted May 4, 2011 I read an article about the picture thing and they put it in context for me. It said something like imagine if one of the world leaders was killed and then their dead body was paraded all over the internet/news. We would be in uproar. Bin Laden is not a trophy and showing the picture will acheive nothing but antagonise those we wish not to. Pretty much changed my mind on wanting to see a picture of the dead fucker.
Fierce_LiNk Posted May 4, 2011 Posted May 4, 2011 I read an article about the picture thing and they put it in context for me. It said something like imagine if one of the world leaders was killed and then their dead body was paraded all over the internet/news. We would be in uproar. Bin Laden is not a trophy and showing the picture will acheive nothing but antagonise those we wish not to. Pretty much changed my mind on wanting to see a picture of the dead fucker. The whole idea of putting dead bodies on show is such a grim thought, anyway. That last picture is just awful. Just everything about it. Horrible. It's just horrid to think that a short while before that picture was taken, that was a human who was alive. Something about that is quite unsettling.
MadDog Posted May 4, 2011 Posted May 4, 2011 Agree with the above posts. Comparing it to CSI is silly, that's a TV programme, this is reality. It's a massive difference.
EEVILMURRAY Posted May 5, 2011 Posted May 5, 2011 Comparing it to CSI is silly, that's a TV programme, this is reality. It's a massive difference. I agree, I was expecting such an outroar. But the loveliness of television has shown much worse things. It's numbed my reception to such things. Someone with slight burn marks on the news? Compare that with Del in The Green Mile and you find yourself not caring as much*, even if the former is not fictional. *Assuming you don't know them.
Ashley Posted May 5, 2011 Posted May 5, 2011 Apparently The Rock (yes, the wannabe actor The Rock) may have known about Bin Laden's death prior to it being announced: http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/showbiz/news/a317811/the-rock-knew-of-osama-bin-laden-death-first.html
The Mad Monkey Posted May 5, 2011 Posted May 5, 2011 The whole idea of putting dead bodies on show is such a grim thought, anyway. Meh, they showed Saddams execution and his dead kids, where's the big difference? Everything is just far too convenient.
Dan_Dare Posted May 5, 2011 Posted May 5, 2011 Dude, you're so full of shit it's unbelievable. How many witness accounts, testimonies and records is it going to take? You're 'theory' is just you sticking your head in the sand and shouting 'NYAH NYAH NYAH NYAH!' like a toddler because you don't believe The Man. You have no evidence, no basis and no credible reasoning behind anything you've said in this thread yet you still describe the absolute mountain of evidence from the other side 'too convenient' or just evidence of a cover up. So, please. Unless you can provide anything to support your argument, or even a credible hypothesis as to why they'd have not announced his death before, shut up. You're talking complete horseshit.
The Mad Monkey Posted May 5, 2011 Posted May 5, 2011 So, please. Unless you can provide anything to support your argument, or even a credible hypothesis as to why they'd have not announced his death before, shut up. I already did, they only just found out and it looks better for them saying they killed him than telling everyone they've been wasting resources looking for a dead man. There's no mountains of evidence that they did anything more than trash a house either.
Jonnas Posted May 5, 2011 Posted May 5, 2011 I already did, they only just found out and it looks better for them saying they killed him than telling everyone they've been wasting resources looking for a dead man. Actually, it would probably be better for them to say they already found him dead than it would be for them to make a martyr out of Osama Bin Laden. This way, the gates are open for accusations of "they killed him in cold blood" as opposed to a justified shooting. Which honestly, I think it's a more plausible (and incriminating) theory than "he's been dead all along for 3 years"
The Mad Monkey Posted May 5, 2011 Posted May 5, 2011 Actually, it would probably be better for them to say they already found him dead than it would be for them to make a martyr out of Osama Bin Laden. This way, the gates are open for accusations of "they killed him in cold blood" as opposed to a justified shooting. Which honestly, I think it's a more plausible (and incriminating) theory than "he's been dead all along for 3 years" It's a win win situation this way though, Obama gets to be a hero for getting rid of him, the muslim world gets to have him as a martyr, and the 'he resisted capture' story means nobody is at fault.
Dan_Dare Posted May 5, 2011 Posted May 5, 2011 Yes, because I'm sure the White House considers 'giving the muslim world a martyr' (All of them, too!) part of a desired win win.
Jonnas Posted May 5, 2011 Posted May 5, 2011 ... the muslim world gets to have him as a martyr,... This is exactly the sort of thing they want to prevent, though. If they really found him dead, they wouldn't come out and say "HA! It was us who killed him!", because this is the sort of thing that gives terrorist groups reason to act again.
MoogleViper Posted May 5, 2011 Posted May 5, 2011 sticking your head in the sand like a toddler Nah you're thinking of an ostrich. Either that or you'd make a really bad parent. It's a win win situation this way though, Obama gets to be a hero for getting rid of him, the muslim world gets to have him as a martyr, and the 'he resisted capture' story means nobody is at fault. Why would they want to provide the muslim world with a martyr? (And just to clarify it's not the entire muslim world that would consider him a martyr.) And how would they have been wasting resources trying to find a dead guy? You really think this whole war was just to find one man? So according to you the US are gonna pull out of this war now, because they were only searching for one man, and now they've found him the war is over.
Dan_Dare Posted May 5, 2011 Posted May 5, 2011 It's about as reasonable as everything else he's said so far, Moogle. I wouldn't put it past him.
The Mad Monkey Posted May 5, 2011 Posted May 5, 2011 This is exactly the sort of thing they want to prevent, though. If they really found him dead, they wouldn't come out and say "HA! It was us who killed him!", because this is the sort of thing that gives terrorist groups reason to act again. It's unpreventable though, you think Muslim extremists would not be suspicious if he was reported found dead by the US Military? The only way to avoid it would be if it was reported by his own people that he had died, a good reason to keep his death quiet for them. And how would they have been wasting resources trying to find a dead guy? Are you saying they just found him by chance?
MoogleViper Posted May 5, 2011 Posted May 5, 2011 Are you saying they just found him by chance? No I'm saying they were attempting to find Al Qaeda(sp?) and other terrorist organisations.
drahkon Posted May 5, 2011 Posted May 5, 2011 (edited) It's unpreventable though, you think Muslim extremists would not be suspicious if he was reported found dead by the US Military? The only way to avoid it would be if it was reported by his own people that he had died, a good reason to keep his death quiet for them. Yeah, because Muslim extremists would've definitely thought and reported that he died a natural death if they'd found him. There is no way one could've prevented Bin Laden becoming a martyr. He wasn't a person anymore, he was a symbol. Edited May 5, 2011 by drahkon
Ramar Posted May 5, 2011 Posted May 5, 2011 Meh, they showed Saddams execution and his dead kids, where's the big difference? Everything is just far too convenient. Weren't those images and videos leaked by Iraqis and not the US Government?
EEVILMURRAY Posted May 5, 2011 Posted May 5, 2011 Are you saying they just found him by chance? It's not as if they just fucking started looking for him. They've been at it for ages. Damn them terrorists, they're always in the last place you look.
Ellmeister Posted May 5, 2011 Posted May 5, 2011 http://www.prisonplanet.com/top-us-government-insider-bin-laden-died-in-2001-911-a-false-flag.html More theories!
Mokong Posted May 5, 2011 Posted May 5, 2011 maybe something for conspiracy theorists to have a listen to *possible use of offensive language
Recommended Posts