GENIUS FORUMS

Just to remedy what seems a glaring omission in Worldly Matters.

The question - if we assume they really found him, and he was surrounded by a team of the most highly trained killers in the world, isn't it possible they merely captured him and concocted the burial at sea story? It seems they could have just as easily neutralized him and made sure he was not wrapped with explosives (why would he be unless he were expecting them?) and taken him into custody. To eliminate such a potential information trove doesn't quite seem optimal.

Isn't it possible they want the world to think he is dead, which even his sympathizers appear to concede, while they take their time waterboarding him once or twice a day until he spills what he knows about the terror network he helped create? He sounds like he is personally a pussy - he may come clean without too much pressure.

This way they have him in perpetuity with no need for niceties like a trial.

Any discussion is merely speculation.

Although, the story seems rather odd. They shot him in the head, when he was unarmed, and they will not go into detail what threat he posed. One would think that if Obama had the opportunity to capture him, they would in fact take him alive to acquire as much information they would about future plots, terrorist networks and so on.

In such a modern age of political deception, it is difficult to know when politicians are telling the truth, or lying as a means to push some hidden agenda.

cousinbasil wrote: concocted the burial at sea story?

It does seem a little fishy.

Blair: "seems fishy"

In the interview by BBC in 2007 Benazir Bhutto, claimed (before she was killed) that OBL was killed by former British Intelligence officer Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh in 2001. Omar Sheikh had connections that reached high into Pakistan’s military and intelligence elite and into the innermost circles of Osama Bin Laden. In July 2002 Omar was sentenced to death for the kidnapping and murder of Wall Street journalist Daniel Pearl.

http://newscastmedia.com/blog/2011/05/0 ... bin-laden/

In the interview by BBC in 2007 Benazir Bhutto, claimed (before she was killed) that OBL was killed by former British Intelligence officer Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh in 2001.

Could Benazir have meant something else? It is pretty clear, if you watch this second clip, she later asserts Osama is still very much alive.

cousinbasil wrote:Could Benazir have meant something else?

I think she was very clear on what she ment. Second guessing what she meant proves nothing. There is no resemblance between the two names. The men are of different nationalities with no resemblance. Stretches the credulity imo to 0.

Why not go back to reinterpreting bible and second guessing what god "meant".

It is pretty clear, if you watch this second clip, she later asserts Osama is still very much alive.

She never "retracted" what she said. If she had, I appreciate if you point out where "she asserts Osama is still very much alive."
To add to all the strangeness of the man who was the greatest hide and seek champion of the world evading for 10 years greatest military intelligence the world has EVER seen, they 'dump' Osama Bin Ladens body in the Ocean, after going to the trouble to "take possession" of his just killed corpse. S T R A N G E is insufficient.
The argument is 'mute'. All the evidence now is sleeping with the fishes.
... but thanks for 'alternative' perspective.

I don't watch much TV, so when I made this thread I had not seen the many reports on the latest SEAL raid in Pakistan.

I think if you take everybody' reactions into account, it's pretty clear Osama was alive and in that compound, and is now dead or in captivity somewhere at Langley.

I enjoy a conspiracy theory as much as the next person, but you are wrong about Bhutto clip. She clearly meant Pearl, not Bin Laden - based on everything else she was saying.

1456200423 wrote:There is no resemblance between the two names. The men are of different nationalities with no resemblance. Stretches the credulity imo to 0.

This means nothing whatsoever. A slip of the tongue does not necessarily entail resemblance or anything else. Please.

Why not go back to reinterpreting bible and second guessing what god "meant".

People do that all the time, so what? God didn't write the Bible, nor did its authors transcribe him.

I think you are maintaining this viewpoint because Bhuto is dead and cannot be asked what she meant. If she did indeed mean Bin Laden was dead, you would have heard more about it in the news at the time. And she would have been wrong, since his supporters and critics alike insisted he was alive until last week, and now both camps say he is dead.

I do not mind if people rewrite or reinterpret the Bible, BTW - it is little more than sketchy and corrupted history. Rewriting known history is altogether another, higher level of egregious liberty-taking.

But feel free to reinterpret as you see fit.

As dead as a dodo.

cousinbasil wrote:I enjoy a conspiracy theory as much as the next person, but you are wrong about Bhutto clip. She clearly meant Pearl, not Bin Laden - based on everything else she was saying.

I think you are wrong on this, what she clearly meant was Joe Rogan. My royal scryer agrees with me.


Joe Rogan - The American War Machine
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jl2JQfxnnHU