Bin Laden is dead

[kwb]

Team 6 doesn't apply to military protocol. Oh and there is no Team 6.

 

[Duck Rodgers]

If no one from the house was shooting, that would mean we executed him without even a trial.

If Osama had no gun, but other people in the house (and in particular in the room with Osama) were shooting, it's no big deal.

Are you just presenting the other side, or does that really bother you in this situation?

 

[kwb]

Another conspiracy I heard...

Tim Osman voted for Obama.

 

[Duck Rodgers]

The local John Birchers have advanced the following claims:

(1) Osama actually died of kidney failure in 12/2001; Benazir Bhutto was murdered for reporting it;

(2) Osama's CIA name was "Tim Osman" and he dined at the White House;

(3) US intervention in the Middle East is meant to change Muslim culture to accept central banks.

What say you oh jazzfanz guru of conspiracies?

If you ever talk to Birchers tell them you think they are a part of the Illuminati....because they are.

1) Possible. It really comes down to sources and who you trust. I don't trust the CIA director or Obama over the guy that used to run the Pakistani ISI or Bhutto who was considered a fairly reputable woman. Those countries are worse off economically, but that doesn't mean their government/people are equally low on the character scale, though of course you have to take into account what Pakistan could gain by saying he was dead. I'm okay with going along with the current US government led narrative of Osama's death until there are enough anomalies to make it implausible. It's too early to say. But yes, before this new development I was leaning towards Osama being dead. If this changes that, so be it.

2) Definitely was Tim Osman at one time and probably assumed other names as well. I don't know whether he has ever been to the White House. Anwar Al-Awlaki did dine at the Pentagon. 3 out of the top 4 current Al Qaeda guys were raised in the US. The CIA/Pentagon does run/aid Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood is ran by MI-6. The big terror events were all staged, most of the suicide bombings are legitimate terror, and the ethnic fighting all over the globe is all real.

3) Destory OPEC, get somebody else to start a fight Iran, and ruin the dollar. The Middle East already has central banks, they just aren't owned by the black nobility banking cartels. There isn't enough non-oil money to make that interesting yet.

 

[Scat]

If you ever talk to Birchers tell them you think they are a part of the Illuminati....because they are.

1) Possible. It really comes down to sources and who you trust. I don't trust the CIA director or Obama over the guy that used to run the Pakistani ISI or Bhutto who was considered a fairly reputable woman. Those countries are worse off economically, but that doesn't mean their government/people are equally low on the character scale, though of course you have to take into account what Pakistan could gain by saying he was dead. I'm okay with going along with the current US government led narrative of Osama's death until there are enough anomalies to make it implausible. It's too early to say. But yes, before this new development I was leaning towards Osama being dead. If this changes that, so be it.

2) Definitely was Tim Osman at one time and probably assumed other names as well. I don't know whether he has ever been to the White House. Anwar Al-Awlaki did dine at the Pentagon. 3 out of the top 4 current Al Qaeda guys are US citizens. The CIA/Pentagon does run/aid Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood is ran by MI-6. The big terror events were all staged, most of the suicide bombings are legitimate terror, and the ethnic fighting all over the globe is all real.

3) Destory OPEC, get somebody else to start a fight Iran, and ruin the dollar. The Middle East already has central banks, they just aren't owned by the black nobility banking cartels. There isn't enough non-oil money to make that interesting yet.

And we thought birthers were nuts.

 

[One Brow]

Are you just presenting the other side, or does that really bother you in this situation?

I believe in the rule of law, even (and especially) for the worst scum of the earth.

 

[sirkickyass]

If you ever talk to Birchers tell them you think they are a part of the Illuminati....because they are.

Details please. I would love to torment the Madame's parents with this one.

 

[PearlWatson]

It's a vindication if 1) the ends justifies the means, and 2) there were no better means available. Otherwise, even if it is true, it does nothing to change the brutality, immorality, and lack of necessity for torture. I reject 1) morally, and 2) is false based on the experience of decades of interrogaters. Any discussion of whether this or that bit of relevant information came from torture is a sideshow, and not relevant to the issues that torture demans the people who use it and is not more effective than legal interrogation techniques.

If you believe Rumsfeld, as SKAss does, there was no torture. There was normal to intense interrogation...legal interrogation techniques. CIA interrogators are vindicated from liberal lies that they were using torture.

 

[sirkickyass]

If you believe Rumsfeld, as SKAss does, there was no torture. There was normal to intense interrogation...legal interrogation techniques. CIA interrogators are vindicated from liberal lies that they were using torture.

Lets not go that far. Rumsfeld says they weren't waterboarding at Gitmo. That's a far cry from saying the US government wasn't waterboarding anywhere.

Personally I think it's a question of fact as to where the waterboarding actually occurred, but it's not a question of fact that they ceased waterboarding KSM (unless they've managed to do it secretly and have no leak) in or around 2005. There's also no indication that the evidence used to track the courier in this instance was obtained in 2005 or earlier because the timeline given by officials indicates they received the name of the courier in around 2007. Therefore, and this is the tricky part for those who are challenged in deductive reasoning, because they stopped waterboarding KSM before they got the critical intelligence they could not have received the information from KSM as a result of waterboarding.

I believe Millsapa's considered response will be something nonsensical that uses the word "liberal" as an epithet. Her skull is not a permeable membrane to reasoned argument.

 

[TroutBum]

Lets not go that far. Rumsfeld says they weren't waterboarding at Gitmo. That's a far cry from saying the US government wasn't waterboarding anywhere.

Personally I think it's a question of fact as to where the waterboarding actually occurred, but it's not a question of fact that they ceased waterboarding KSM (unless they've managed to do it secretly and have no leak) in or around 2005. There's also no indication that the evidence used to track the courier in this instance was obtained in 2005 or earlier because the timeline given by officials indicates they received the name of the courier in around 2007. Therefore, and this is the tricky part for those who are challenged in deductive reasoning, because they stopped waterboarding KSM before they got the critical intelligence they could not have received the information from KSM as a result of waterboarding.

I believe Millsapa's considered response will be something nonsensical that uses the word "liberal" as an epithet. Her skull is not a permeable membrane to reasoned argument.

Reminds me of someone else...

 

[PearlWatson]

Lets not go that far. Rumsfeld says they weren't waterboarding at Gitmo. That's a far cry from saying the US government wasn't waterboarding anywhere.

Personally I think it's a question of fact as to where the waterboarding actually occurred, but it's not a question of fact that they ceased waterboarding KSM (unless they've managed to do it secretly and have no leak) in or around 2005. There's also no indication that the evidence used to track the courier in this instance was obtained in 2005 or earlier because the timeline given by officials indicates they received the name of the courier in around 2007. Therefore, and this is the tricky part for those who are challenged in deductive reasoning, because they stopped waterboarding KSM before they got the critical intelligence they could not have received the information from KSM as a result of waterboarding.

I believe Millsapa's considered response will be something nonsensical that uses the word "liberal" as an epithet. Her skull is not a permeable membrane to reasoned argument.

Too bad there are holes in your "reasoned argument" big enough for Obama to fit through without getting his ears stuck.

First of all the Obama Regime said the information came from multiple detainees, so you have a problem if you want to hang your hat on one terrorist.

Secondly, you would have to assume that KSM was one of those detainees, and that the waterboarding that occurred before the information came out had no effect on KSM's willingness to talk.

Frankly, I value Cheney's informed beliefs over your "reasoned arguments" any day.

Former Vice President Dick Cheney said he believes harsh interrogations likely contributed to finding bin Laden.

 

[TroutBum]

I listened to a little Rush the other day and laughed when he used the term, "Regime" when talking about Obama. Clearly, MillHopper is all aboard the dumbass train.