PDA

View Full Version : Bin Laden buried at sea


Pages : [1] 2

Hog Farmer
05-02-2011, 06:00 AM
I hope they did it from an altitude of 30,000 feet with an anvil tied to his ass!

acesn8s
05-02-2011, 06:09 AM
I hope they did it from an altitude of 30,000 feet with an anvil tied to his ass!Or a hog carrying the swine flu, though the pig wouldn't deserve it.

HonestChieffan
05-02-2011, 06:13 AM
Seems odd.

CrazyPhuD
05-02-2011, 06:13 AM
Mmmmm....terrorist chum.....

Wonder if he tasted like chicken?

Hog Farmer
05-02-2011, 06:22 AM
Seems odd.

News said according to Islam tradition burial must take place within 24 hours. The U.S. didn't want there to be a place for the people to build a shrine.

Hog Farmer
05-02-2011, 06:23 AM
Mmmmm....terrorist chum.....

Wonder if he tasted like chicken?

Maybe until they took a wiff of his right hand.

acesn8s
05-02-2011, 06:25 AM
News said according to Islam tradition burial must take place within 24 hours. The U.S. didn't want there to be a place for the people to build a shrine.In that case, they should have buried him under pig shit and watch the fuckers flip out.

Bane
05-02-2011, 06:31 AM
They should have bronzed his head and put it on a pike at ground zero.

58-4ever
05-02-2011, 06:38 AM
Seems fishy to me too

Saulbadguy
05-02-2011, 06:58 AM
News said according to Islam tradition burial must take place within 24 hours. The U.S. didn't want there to be a place for the people to build a shrine.

I heard something that they offered the body to Saudi Arabia, but they didn't want it.

MIAdragon
05-02-2011, 07:01 AM
I doubt it. I don't see taking a chance with his body.

mlyonsd
05-02-2011, 07:02 AM
I hope they did it from an altitude of 30,000 feet with an anvil tied to his ass!
They should have cut him up and given him to you as hog feed.

crazycoffey
05-02-2011, 07:14 AM
brillant BTW. wonder who thought that one up....

Extra Point
05-02-2011, 07:43 AM
brillant BTW. wonder who thought that one up....

More than a million US citizens. I sure did. No ceremony, no shrine. That simple.

Radar Chief
05-02-2011, 07:44 AM
They should have cut him up and given him to you as hog feed.

/Brick Top

ReynardMuldrake
05-02-2011, 07:48 AM
brillant BTW. wonder who thought that one up....

The point is not to make him a martyr. No grave, no shrine location except the bottom of the ocean. Kind of an undignified burial, but not shocking enough to become a terrorist recruitment tool.

Radar Chief
05-02-2011, 07:48 AM
News said according to Islam tradition burial must take place within 24 hours. The U.S. didn't want there to be a place for the people to build a shrine.

I was wondering WTF they’d bury him at sea but this does make sense.

Crush
05-02-2011, 07:49 AM
Seems fishy to me too

Pun of the Year

crazycoffey
05-02-2011, 07:51 AM
The point is not to make him a martyr. No grave, no shrine location except the bottom of the ocean. Kind of an undignified burial, but not shocking enough to become a terrorist recruitment tool.

oh I know and agree with it, just commenting on the brillance of it

ReynardMuldrake
05-02-2011, 07:54 AM
oh I know and agree with it, just commenting on the brillance of it

I misunderstood you then, you sounded pretty sarcastic there.

crazycoffey
05-02-2011, 08:06 AM
I misunderstood you then, you sounded pretty sarcastic there.

awesome, I'm usually quite sarcastic and misunderstood, now I'm serious but still misunderstood. mmm, what could that mean?

WV
05-02-2011, 08:19 AM
Bound to cause controversy...."Is he really dead?".

seaofred
05-02-2011, 08:23 AM
Bound to cause controversy...."Is he really dead?".

Yeah, let's hope he is and this isn't some lame attempt by Obama to get in the good graces of the American people.. Just in time for his re-election attempt.

Radar Chief
05-02-2011, 08:26 AM
Yeah, let's hope he is and this isn't some lame attempt by Obama to get in the good graces of the American people.. Just in time for his re-election attempt.

IMO the timing is way off for this to be an election boosting stunt.

WV
05-02-2011, 08:28 AM
Yeah, let's hope he is and this isn't some lame attempt by Obama to get in the good graces of the American people.. Just in time for his re-election attempt.

Not sure about this, but there were reasons for hanging Mussolini in the square.

InChiefsHell
05-02-2011, 08:35 AM
I believe this is real. No way they try to pull a fast one with something this big. Obama would not want egg on his face. Trust me, they crossed every t and dotted every i.

Burial at sea is perfect. Well, next to wrapping him in a bacon suit and displaying his body at a pig roast for the American soldiers who killed him...all broadcast on youtube of course...

jAZ
05-02-2011, 08:35 AM
Yeah, let's hope he is and this isn't some lame attempt by Obama to get in the good graces of the American people.. Just in time for his re-election attempt.

Oh he'll. Are Obama's opponents really this ridiculous? Yes, maybe he staged an "October Suprise" in May, 18 months before the election. And do it by staging an elaborate hoax so publicly that moments after you claim you've killed the worlds most wanted man, OBL makes yet another public appearance proving you lied.

Worst considered conspiracy theory evar.

Radar Chief
05-02-2011, 08:41 AM
Are Obama's opponents really this ridiculous?

Of course they are. Bush’s were. You of all people should know that. :Poke:

Dave Lane
05-02-2011, 08:41 AM
Not sure about this, but there were reasons for hanging Mussolini in the square.

Umm apparently you aren't much of a history buff.

Radar Chief
05-02-2011, 08:43 AM
Burial at sea is perfect.

Agreed. At first I was like WTF but the more I read about it the more I like it.
You just know if Osama had to die he would’ve wanted to be a martyr, to have his burial place revered for generations to come. He’s been denied that, which is effing beautiful.

ReynardMuldrake
05-02-2011, 08:48 AM
Agreed. At first I was like WTF but the more I read about it the more I like it.
You just know if Osama had to die he would’ve wanted to be a martyr, to have his burial place revered for generations to come. He’s been denied that, which is effing beautiful.

I think it's perfect. It's within burial customs so it avoids angering Muslims, it's in international waters so no country has to claim him, it's impossible to build a shrine there, and we still get to turn him into shark food.

It's pretty much the opposite of what he would have wanted. I like it.

PhillyChiefFan
05-02-2011, 08:52 AM
/Brick Top

I hope they removed his teeth and fingernails...

:D

KChiefs1
05-02-2011, 08:57 AM
Is there proof he is really dead?

Crush
05-02-2011, 08:58 AM
Is there proof he is really dead?

This isn't Halloween 5 or Friday the 13th Part VIII. I doubt Osama is going to crawl out of the water.

WV
05-02-2011, 09:00 AM
Umm apparently you aren't much of a history buff.

Technicalities aside you get the drift...geesh some people are just on a mission to be the interwebz wiki.

kstater
05-02-2011, 09:01 AM
Is there proof he is really dead?

And it begins.

kstater
05-02-2011, 09:13 AM
Video confirmation:

<font face="Verdana" size="1" color="#999999"><br/><a href="http://www.myspace.com/video/vid/18428935" style="font: Verdana">Walk The Plank!</a><br/><object width="425px" height="360px" ><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"/><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"/><param name="wmode" value="transparent"/><param name="movie" value="http://mediaservices.myspace.com/services/media/embed.aspx/m=18428935,t=1,mt=video"/><embed src="http://mediaservices.myspace.com/services/media/embed.aspx/m=18428935,t=1,mt=video" width="425" height="360" allowFullScreen="true" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" allowScriptAccess="always"></embed></object><br/><a href="http://www.myspace.com/39854380" style="font: Verdana">~: Tamara :~</a> | <a href="http://www.myspace.com/video" style="font: Verdana">Myspace Video</a></font>

jAZ
05-02-2011, 09:27 AM
Is there proof he is really dead?

Why is this so hard for people to figure out? If he's not dead, he'll be around to tell the world shortly. That's what he does. That will stop.

But from what was just reported, Obama was actually watching the raid from the situation room. With cameras, etc, I'm sure there is video out there of the whole thing. Doubt we'll see it any time soon though.

Valiant
05-02-2011, 09:33 AM
I also liked the idea of burying him at westburo in topeka.

Huffmeister
05-02-2011, 09:35 AM
Oh he'll. Are Obama's opponents really this ridiculous? Yes, maybe he staged an "October Suprise" in May, 18 months before the election. And do it by staging an elaborate hoax so publicly that moments after you claim you've killed the worlds most wanted man, OBL makes yet another public appearance proving you lied.

Worst considered conspiracy theory evar.

Nah, it's no worse than this conspiracy theory:

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=3045170&postcount=24

I've never gotten into "MIHOP" (made it happen on purpose)... but I really, really can't shake the "Let it Happen On Purpose"...

So to answer the question your posed... AQ is "responsible" for 9/11 by commiting the act.

I just suspect that the Bush Administration might have deliberately turned a blind eye to the mounting threat, thinking that it might be a subway bombing or something relatively small, but enough to use as a justification for war in Afganistan and then Iraq.

I don't believe for a minute that they knew exactly what it was going to be.

buddha
05-02-2011, 09:38 AM
He'll be a martyr no matter how you bury him. I do agree with the idea of leaving no spot to memorialize. What might have been even better is to take his carcus up to the North Pole and encourage all of his followers to visit him there.

Lonewolf Ed
05-02-2011, 09:41 AM
He'll be a martyr no matter how you bury him. I do agree with the idea of leaving no spot to memorialize. What might have been even better is to take his carcus up to the North Pole and encourage all of his followers to visit him there.

Why not say there is a shrine on the ocean floor? The ones who came to pay homage to him would drown much faster than they'd freeze to death! LMAO

WV
05-02-2011, 09:43 AM
I don't understand all the care taken to treat the body as Muslim tradition dictates? Do any real Muslims outside of the radical ones no one wants to recognize even want to claim this nut job as a Muslim?

I get the point...we don't want to give radicals more cause to fight, but I'd be insulted by all this stuff if I were a good Muslim.

crazycoffey
05-02-2011, 09:51 AM
I don't understand all the care taken to treat the body as Muslim tradition dictates? Do any real Muslims outside of the radical ones no one wants to recognize even want to claim this nut job as a Muslim?

I get the point...we don't want to give radicals more cause to fight, but I'd be insulted by all this stuff if I were a good Muslim.

hearts and minds.....

the difference is this action is less likely to produce more, new radicals than any other thing we could have done

'Hamas' Jenkins
05-02-2011, 09:54 AM
But from what was just reported, Obama was actually watching the raid from the situation room. With cameras, etc, I'm sure there is video out there of the whole thing. Doubt we'll see it any time soon though.

That is fucking hardcore.

NewChief
05-02-2011, 09:59 AM
Why is this so hard for people to figure out? If he's not dead, he'll be around to tell the world shortly. That's what he does. That will stop.

But from what was just reported, Obama was actually watching the raid from the situation room. With cameras, etc, I'm sure there is video out there of the whole thing. Doubt we'll see it any time soon though.

I wonder if Obama sat there with his Xbox controller and shouted, "Owned, bitch!" at the kill shot.

'Hamas' Jenkins
05-02-2011, 10:03 AM
http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQVFmx0-EfcFOEn3sfPKGOPkkvk5pLwxU1xIBJtHo1XgCFTQaS7DQ


I wonder if Obama sat there with his Xbox controller and shouted, "Owned, bitch!" at the kill shot.

Dante84
05-02-2011, 10:22 AM
<iframe width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/jgA2xo0HYrE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Chiefnj2
05-02-2011, 10:25 AM
I don't understand all the care taken to treat the body as Muslim tradition dictates? Do any real Muslims outside of the radical ones no one wants to recognize even want to claim this nut job as a Muslim?

I get the point...we don't want to give radicals more cause to fight, but I'd be insulted by all this stuff if I were a good Muslim.

Saying burial at sea = no body, no site for martyrdom, no shrine, no rallying point, etc.

Rain Man
05-02-2011, 10:29 AM
Saying burial at sea = no body, no site for martyrdom, no shrine, no rallying point, etc.


Yep. Burial at sea is a good story.

Burial at C. Hangar C in Area 51 so we can trot out new photos and hair samples and teeth as needed. But let the radicals row out off the coast of Somalia to pay their respects.

ReynardMuldrake
05-02-2011, 10:29 AM
But from what was just reported, Obama was actually watching the raid from the situation room. With cameras, etc, I'm sure there is video out there of the whole thing. Doubt we'll see it any time soon though.

They oughta license the footage and release it in theaters as a feature-length documentary. Talk about a summer blockbuster!

Rausch
05-02-2011, 10:30 AM
Yep. Burial at sea is a good story.

Burial at C. Hangar C in Area 51 so we can trot out new photos and hair samples and teeth as needed. But let the radicals row out off the coast of Somalia to pay their respects.

LMAO

ReynardMuldrake
05-02-2011, 10:31 AM
Yep. Burial at sea is a good story.

Burial at C. Hangar C in Area 51 so we can trot out new photos and hair samples and teeth as needed. But let the radicals row out off the coast of Somalia to pay their respects.

Huh? Why would they fake a DNA match? Or release the burial location, for that matter?

Watery grave = location unknown.

Mr. Laz
05-02-2011, 10:38 AM
Oh he'll. Are Obama's opponents really this ridiculous? :spock:

you have to ask?

http://0.tqn.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/b/r/2/obama-not-citizen.gif

Fish
05-02-2011, 10:40 AM
Why don't we just call it a "dumping" instead of a "burial"?

DeezNutz
05-02-2011, 10:41 AM
Nah, it's no worse than this conspiracy theory:

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=3045170&postcount=24

False binaries are always highly effective.

Regarding this bitch's burial. There can always be a way of commemorating a martyr. In absence of a grave, for instance, the place of his death can be a destination for pilgrimage.

So, we really "prevented" nothing, though I'm just as happy to avoid any bullshit ceremony associated with this idiot's death.

ForeverChiefs58
05-02-2011, 10:44 AM
Fuck him we should feed all terrorists to hogs!

Islamic scholars question bin Laden's sea burial

CAIRO – Muslim clerics said Monday that Osama bin Laden's burial at sea was a violation of Islamic tradition that may further provoke militant calls for revenge attacks against American targets.

Although there appears to be some room for debate over the burial — as with many issues within the faith — a wide range of Islamic scholars interpreted it as a humiliating disregard for the standard Muslim practice of placing the body in a grave with the head pointed toward the holy city of Mecca.

Sea burials can be allowed, they said, but only in special cases where the death occurred aboard a ship.

"The Americans want to humiliate Muslims through this burial, and I don't think this is in the interest of the U.S. administration," said Omar Bakri Mohammed, a radical cleric in Lebanon.

A U.S. official said that the burial decision was made after concluding that it would have been difficult to find a country willing to accept the remains. There also was speculation about worry that a grave site could have become a rallying point for militants.

The U.S. official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive national security matters, did not say where the burial took place.

U.S. President Barack Obama said the remains had been handled in accordance with Islamic custom, which requires speedy burial.

But the Lebanese cleric Mohammed called it a "strategic mistake" that was bound to stoke rage.

In Washington, CIA director Leon Panetta warned that "terrorists almost certainly will attempt to avenge" the killing of the mastermind behind the Sept. 11 attacks.

"Bin Laden is dead," Panetta wrote in a memo to CIA staff. "Al-Qaida is not."

According to Islamic teachings, the highest honor to be bestowed on the dead is giving the deceased a swift burial, preferably before sunset. Those who die while traveling at sea can have their bodies committed to the bottom of the ocean if they are far off the coast, according to Islamic tradition.

"They can say they buried him at sea, but they cannot say they did it according to Islam," Mohammed al-Qubaisi, Dubai's grand mufti, said about bin Laden's burial. "If the family does not want him, it's really simple in Islam: You dig up a grave anywhere, even on a remote island, you say the prayers and that's it."

"Sea burials are permissible for Muslims in extraordinary circumstances," he added. "This is not one of them."

But Mohammed Qudah, a professor of Islamic law at the University of Jordan, said burying the Saudi-born bin Laden at sea was not forbidden if there was nobody to receive the body and provide a Muslim burial.

"The land and the sea belong to God, who is able to protect and raise the dead at the end of times for Judgment Day," he said. "It's neither true nor correct to claim that there was nobody in the Muslim world ready to receive Bin Laden's body."

Clerics in Iraq — where an offshoot of al-Qaida is blamed for the death of thousands of people since 2003 — also criticized the U.S. action. One said it only benefited fish.

"If a man dies on a ship that is a long distance from land, then the dead man should be buried at the sea," said Shiite cleric Ibrahim al-Jabari. "But if he dies on land, then he should be buried in the ground, not to be thrown into the sea. Otherwise, this would be only inviting fish to a banquet."

The Islamic tradition of a quick burial was the subject of intense debate in Iraq in 2003 when U.S. forces embalmed the bodies of Saddam Hussein's two sons after they were killed in a firefight. Their bodies were later shown to media.

"What was done by the Americans is forbidden by Islam and might provoke some Muslims," said another Islamic scholar from Iraq, Abdul-Sattar al-Janabi, who preaches at Baghdad's famous Abu Hanifa mosque. "It is not acceptable and it is almost a crime to throw the body of a Muslim man into the sea. The body of bin Laden should have been handed over to his family to look for a country or land to bury him."

Prominent Egyptian Islamic analyst and lawyer Montasser el-Zayat said bin Laden's sea burial was designed to prevent his grave from becoming a shrine. But an option was an unmarked grave.

"They don't want to see him become a symbol, but he is already a symbol in people's hearts."

Iowanian
05-02-2011, 10:44 AM
He lives in a pineapple under the sea!


Bin Laden's corpse is being sodomized by Sponge Bob Square Pants

Pitt Gorilla
05-02-2011, 10:50 AM
Seems odd.Not really.

ROYC75
05-02-2011, 10:54 AM
They should have cut him up and given him to you as hog feed.

That's cruelty to the pigs.

ForeverChiefs58
05-02-2011, 10:54 AM
He lives in a pineapple under the sea!


Bin Laden's corpse is being sodomized by Sponge Bob Square Pants

ROFL

Okie_Apparition
05-02-2011, 10:56 AM
His after death reward will be mermaids, no doubt they'll be virgins. He has all eternity to spank on their eggs.

Rain Man
05-02-2011, 10:59 AM
Huh? Why would they fake a DNA match? Or release the burial location, for that matter?

Watery grave = location unknown.


I'm just saying that he's likely being stored upside down in a meat locker somewhere right now, but burial at sea is a great cover story.

ping2000
05-02-2011, 11:00 AM
He should have been wrapped in bacon, encased in lucite, laid at ground zero with an outhouse built on top so the world could shit and pee on him for eternity.

ReynardMuldrake
05-02-2011, 11:01 AM
I'm just saying that he's likely being stored upside down in a meat locker somewhere right now, but burial at sea is a great cover story.

Possibly, but a secret like that is hard to keep. If that ever came out it would be a PR nightmare.

ForeverChiefs58
05-02-2011, 11:04 AM
He lives in a pineapple under the sea!


Bin Laden's corpse is being sodomized by Sponge Bob Square Pants

I like your idea of burial in remote area then bombing whoever comes to worship his corpse

KCBOSS1
05-02-2011, 11:12 AM
They should have cut off his head, stuck it on a stick and paraded it through New York. They're going to look for any excuse for revenge anyway. Let's give them their money's worth.

Well, that may be a little extreme, but I do believe the American People need proof of death. Seriously. What's to stop this from being staged? The administration needed a serious booster shot. There were reports of Bin Laden having been dead for a long time. Watching the people jump and dance in DC was a little unnerving to me. I mean, if the guys is dead, I'm happy. But it just all seems a little suspicious to me. I hope I'm wrong. But let's see some legitimate pics.

KCBOSS1
05-02-2011, 11:15 AM
How bout putting his Body on display in a clear cornerstone at the base of the second Twin Towers?

DenverDanChiefsFan
05-02-2011, 11:16 AM
Wish they filled the hole in his head with pork first. Fucker doesn't deserve any virgins.

4th and Long
05-02-2011, 11:16 AM
Possibly, but a secret like that is hard to keep. If that ever came out it would be a PR nightmare.

2 words, Mr. President. Plausible deniability.
http://www.mikes-images.com/misc/id/images/id_mq_123.jpg

Pants
05-02-2011, 11:16 AM
How bout putting his Body on display in a clear cornerstone at the base of the second Twin Towers?

How about "Americans are not barbarians?"

People like you are a disgrace to this awesome country.

KCBOSS1
05-02-2011, 11:21 AM
How about "Americans are not barbarians?"

People like you are a disgrace to this awesome country.

It was a joke. I'm not really for that. Calm down Barney. But I am for some proof of death.

Pants
05-02-2011, 11:21 AM
It was a joke. I'm not really for that. Calm down Barney. But I am for some proof of death.

Oh, sorry. And yeah, I'm with you on the pics.

KCBOSS1
05-02-2011, 11:25 AM
Oh, sorry. And yeah, I'm with you on the pics.

I was not even really for the dancing in the streets. That's what radical islamic countries do. I think that gives too much credit to this man and emboldens those who idolize him. Honestly, I think that we should keep it as low keyed and as possible, but seriously provide proof for peace of mind.

Rain Man
05-02-2011, 11:30 AM
It was a joke. I'm not really for that. Calm down Barney. But I am for some proof of death.

As jAZ mentioned last night, the proof of death is that he never makes another appearance. If we did something like this and he was alive, he'd have a tape being released within 24 hours. It'd be pretty dumb to fake this if he's still out there.

And I figure the bad guys might try to release some fake tapes or some generic pre-recorded tape, so we should expect that.

Rain Man
05-02-2011, 11:34 AM
I was not even really for the dancing in the streets. That's what radical islamic countries do. I think that gives too much credit to this man and emboldens those who idolize him. Honestly, I think that we should keep it as low keyed and as possible, but seriously provide proof for peace of mind.


I'm kind of torn on that. I can see your argument, and I can see the argument for the USA being the responsible people on the block who don't celebrate stuff like this and who don't parade his body through town on a pike and who purportedly give him a proper Muslim burial even though he violated most of Islam himself.

However, I think a show of public force and support is a good thing. It shows that the American government was in keeping with the wishes of the people to undertake this power wash of humanity's driveway. Plus, I think it's worth celebrating, and if we don't share our happiness then it's a win for the terrorists. If Americans want to celebrate the elimination of a villain who is trying to kill them, then they should be able to do so.

KCBOSS1
05-02-2011, 12:01 PM
I think a show of public force and support is a good thing. It shows that the American government was in keeping with the wishes of the people to undertake this power wash of humanity's driveway. Plus, I think it's worth celebrating, and if we don't share our happiness then it's a win for the terrorists. If Americans want to celebrate the elimination of a villain who is trying to kill them, then they should be able to do so.[/quote]

That's a good point

teedubya
05-02-2011, 12:09 PM
So they said he was dead. Obama does an 11:30pm speech about it. They did the DNA test immediately. No pictures or videos have been released. His body is immediately thrown in the ocean.

Ok. Got it.

tooge
05-02-2011, 12:13 PM
Osama "luca" Bin Laden sleeps with the fishes

kstater
05-02-2011, 12:15 PM
So they said he was dead. Obama does an 11:30pm speech about it. They did the DNA test immediately. No pictures or videos have been released. His body is immediately thrown in the ocean.

Ok. Got it.

Keep on sticking it to the man.

Bump
05-02-2011, 12:19 PM
They should have bronzed his head and put it on a pike at ground zero.

what sense would that make?

I can picture George W and the oil tycoons giving that "I got away with it and I'm richer than ever" grin on their faces right now

KCBOSS1
05-02-2011, 12:24 PM
Obama: "Obama, I mean Osama Bin Laden is dead."
random citizen: "Wow that's awesome, where is his body?"
Obama: "We had it, tested it, It's him."
random citizen: "Okay, where is it?"
Obama: "We buried it in the ocean"
random citizen: " Where's the DNA test results? Where's the verified photos? How do we know it was really him?"
Obama: "Because I said so! and now so is NBC, CBS, ABC, Fox and CNN! We are waiting for the same company that provided my birth certificate to provide his death certificate and the DNA results! Now please, drink your cool aid and vote for me in 2012."

gblowfish
05-02-2011, 12:26 PM
Obama: "Obama, I mean Osama Bin Laden is dead."
random citizen: "Wow that's awesome, where is his body?"
Obama: "We had it, tested it, It's him."
random citizen: "Okay, where is it?"
Obama: "We buried it in the ocean"
random citizen: " Where's the DNA test results? Where's the verified photos? How do we know it was really him?"
Obama: "Because I said so! and now so is NBC, CBS, ABC, Fox and CNN! We are waiting for the same company that provided my birth certificate to provide his death certificate and the DNA results! Now please, drink your cool aid and vote for me in 2012."

You're wearing aluminum foil on your head, aren't you?

Dave Lane
05-02-2011, 12:33 PM
They should have cut off his head, stuck it on a stick and paraded it through New York. They're going to look for any excuse for revenge anyway. Let's give them their money's worth.

Well, that may be a little extreme, but I do believe the American People need proof of death. Seriously. What's to stop this from being staged? The administration needed a serious booster shot. There were reports of Bin Laden having been dead for a long time. Watching the people jump and dance in DC was a little unnerving to me. I mean, if the guys is dead, I'm happy. But it just all seems a little suspicious to me. I hope I'm wrong. But let's see some legitimate pics.

You are a moran

KCBOSS1
05-02-2011, 12:35 PM
You're wearing aluminum foil on your head, aren't you?

Yes. I am.

KCBOSS1
05-02-2011, 12:36 PM
You are a moran

Probably should learn to spell "moron" before you call somebody one. Kinda loses credibility if you can't spell it. It's moron....Watch: MORON

Pants
05-02-2011, 12:37 PM
Probably should learn to spell "moron" before you call somebody one. Kinda loses credibility if you can't spell it. It's moron....Watch: MORON

It says you joined CP in 2005?

Your and idiot

Dave Lane
05-02-2011, 12:37 PM
Probably should learn to spell "moron" before you call somebody one. Kinda loses credibility if you can't spell it. It's moron....Watch: MORON

You took the short bus to school didn't you :)

KCBOSS1
05-02-2011, 12:38 PM
It says you joined CP in 2005?

Your and idiot

your point?

KCBOSS1
05-02-2011, 12:40 PM
You took the short bus to school didn't you :)

No, my dad took me. I walked home. Got run over a few times, but I don't think it affected me.

Pants
05-02-2011, 12:40 PM
your point?

My point is that after having been on CP for 6 years, you should know the correct CP spelling of certain words.

Bump
05-02-2011, 12:40 PM
Probably should learn to spell "moron" before you call somebody one. Kinda loses credibility if you can't spell it. It's moron....Watch: MORON

:LOL:

ReynardMuldrake
05-02-2011, 12:40 PM
Probably should learn to spell "moron" before you call somebody one. Kinda loses credibility if you can't spell it. It's moron....Watch: MORON

Get a brain, moran.

KCBOSS1
05-02-2011, 12:41 PM
My point is that after having been on CP for 6 years, you should know the correct CP spelling of certain words.


Oh. Got it. Guess I am a moran

Rain Man
05-02-2011, 12:42 PM
Yes. I am.


How do you get it so the creases don't start scraping behind your ears? When I'm wearing mine I always end up getting irritated back there.

Crush
05-02-2011, 12:43 PM
Probably should learn to spell "moron" before you call somebody one. Kinda loses credibility if you can't spell it. It's moron....Watch: MORON

Moran

Crush
05-02-2011, 12:45 PM
Great, now there is a "deather" movement.

KCBOSS1
05-02-2011, 12:46 PM
How do you get it so the creases don't start scraping behind your ears? When I'm wearing mine I always end up getting irritated back there.

haha. I just built up calouses. Give er time lad.

KCBOSS1
05-02-2011, 12:47 PM
Seriously, I would like to see some photos on Bin Laden that aren't fake. Am I alone in this? Does none of this seem odd to you guys?

Bump
05-02-2011, 12:48 PM
http://i1106.photobucket.com/albums/h361/Bump4/moran-vzamo0.jpg

MIAdragon
05-02-2011, 12:48 PM
Seriously, I would like to see some photos on Bin Laden that aren't fake. Am I alone in this? Does none of this seem odd to you guys?

Why incite the animals? Its done, let it be.

Sofa King
05-02-2011, 12:52 PM
When we say he is dead and the AQ say he is dead, he's fucking dead.

End of story.

KCBOSS1
05-02-2011, 12:55 PM
So, the #1 public of the US of all time gets killed and nobody wants to see some visible verification? They showed pics of Saddam immediately. He wasn't even close to as big of an enemy. It's not for gloating. It's for verification, simple peace of mind. The animals are already incited. They've already promised revenge. That's irrelevant.

kstater
05-02-2011, 12:57 PM
Wait a minute...what if his body drifts into contact with the radiated water off Japan?



Super mutant zombie bin laden!! http://goemaw.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/Oh%20No.gif http://goemaw.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/Oh%20No.gif

Crush
05-02-2011, 01:04 PM
Wait a minute...what if his body drifts into contact with the radiated water off Japan?



Super mutant zombie bin laden!! http://goemaw.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/Oh%20No.gif http://goemaw.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/Oh%20No.gif


Please do not give Michael Bay any ideas.

CrazyPhuD
05-02-2011, 01:07 PM
Wait a minute...what if his body drifts into contact with the radiated water off Japan?



Super mutant zombie bin laden!! http://goemaw.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/Oh%20No.gif http://goemaw.com/forum/Smileys/goEMAW/Oh%20No.gif

SEEE just like fucking megatron....dumping enemies bodies in the sea just backfires on you!

Radar Chief
05-02-2011, 01:13 PM
So, the #1 public of the US of all time gets killed and nobody wants to see some visible verification? They showed pics of Saddam immediately. He wasn't even close to as big of an enemy. It's not for gloating. It's for verification, simple peace of mind. The animals are already incited. They've already promised revenge. That's irrelevant.

Saddam was taken alive and it was a pretty huge PR loss for showing pictures of the bodies of Uday and Qusay.
Besides, sounds like half his face is blow off since he to two to the kisser.

scott free
05-02-2011, 01:20 PM
I wanna see the pics & not only that, they should be broadcast across the entire world, hell, we should've put his body in a hanging cage just offshore from NYC, to rot & be picked apart by birds, like they used to do with pirates.

KCBOSS1
05-02-2011, 01:20 PM
Saddam was taken alive and it was a pretty huge PR loss for showing pictures of the bodies of Uday and Qusay.
Besides, sounds like half his face is blow off since he to two to the kisser.

Well that makes sense. First thing I've heard that does.

Coogs
05-02-2011, 01:43 PM
I wanna see the pics & not only that, they should be broadcast across the entire world, hell, we should've put his body in a hanging cage just offshore from NYC, to rot & be picked apart by birds, like they used to do with pirates.

Here could be a pic...

http://www.slate.com/id/2292712/


Put the zoom up to about 400%

kstater
05-02-2011, 01:45 PM
Here could be a pic...

http://www.slate.com/id/2292712/

That's the same terrible photoshop that's been going around for 16 hours, only this time, it's a picture of people looking at the terrible photoshop.

Coogs
05-02-2011, 01:46 PM
That's the same terrible photoshop that's been going around for 16 hours, only this time, it's a picture of people looking at the terrible photoshop.

Oh. Sorry. Been at work and haven't had time to check everything out.

Valiant
05-02-2011, 02:11 PM
As jAZ mentioned last night, the proof of death is that he never makes another appearance. If we did something like this and he was alive, he'd have a tape being released within 24 hours. It'd be pretty dumb to fake this if he's still out there.

And I figure the bad guys might try to release some fake tapes or some generic pre-recorded tape, so we should expect that.

How hard will it be to find a look alike. Most of them look alike already now with the turbins and nasty beards.

Hopefully they build a shrine where he died. Satelite survelience, when enough people get around it. Send in some missles or accidental suicide bombers.

Oregon chief
05-02-2011, 02:13 PM
It's nice to know that every time I pee in the ocean I will be pissing on Osama's grave.

ForeverChiefs58
05-02-2011, 05:49 PM
If Bin Laden was not a Muslim leader, but a mass murderer of Muslims, then why do any burial according to muslim tradition?

CaliforniaChief
05-02-2011, 05:54 PM
If Bin Laden was not a Muslim leader, but a mass murderer of Muslims, then why do any burial according to muslim tradition?

Because perception is more powerful than reality. We just don't want to give people anymore free fodder to incite violence/recruit new martyrs than we have to.

Personally, I'd love to see the picture(s). It would put some sort of visible closure on things and would be gratifying to see that murderer's face re-arranged.

But I would also understand the rationale for not releasing it...if someone's prone to think it's a hoax, and his grill is as messed up as officials say it is, then the picture probably won't be convincing.

My guess is that ultimately they will release it, but that they'll delay things to let emotions simmer down a bit.

That, or they'll release a long-form death certificate in about 3 years. :D

Reerun_KC
05-02-2011, 05:55 PM
Oh. Got it. Guess I am a moran

Seriously, Everyone knows you spell it MUron... The ONLY TRUE spelling of the word...

Donger
05-02-2011, 05:55 PM
If Bin Laden was not a Muslim leader, but a mass murderer of Muslims, then why do any burial according to muslim tradition?

Because he claimed to be a Muslim.

acesn8s
05-02-2011, 06:00 PM
Oh he'll. Are Obama's opponents really this ridiculous? Yes, maybe he staged an "October Suprise" in May, 18 months before the election. And do it by staging an elaborate hoax so publicly that moments after you claim you've killed the worlds most wanted man, OBL makes yet another public appearance proving you lied.

Worst considered conspiracy theory evar.Except for that one about Bush being behind the bombings of the World Trade Centers. But then again, OBL wouldn't need to be killed if it were true. :hmmm: This theory keeps getting bigger.

chasedude
05-02-2011, 06:09 PM
It's nice to know that every time I pee in the ocean I will be pissing on Osama's grave.

How about sushi?LMAO He's on his way to being fish food himself.

KC Tattoo
05-02-2011, 06:12 PM
Hmmm :hmmm: Consider this. A burial for all the militant bastards too show up, that's not a bad idea/ DUKE NUKEM

ForeverChiefs58
05-02-2011, 06:26 PM
Because he claimed to be a Muslim.

I thought he hijacked the religion and was far from being a true muslim? Regardless of what he claimed to be, he was a mass murderer of thousands and I would have hoped he would have been given a burial according to mass murderers tradition. If hitler had claimed to be jewish, should he have been given a traditional jewish burial?

Donger
05-02-2011, 06:27 PM
I thought he hijacked the religion and was far from being a true muslim? Regardless of what he claimed to be, he was a mass murderer of thousands and I would have hoped he would have been given a burial according to mass murderers tradition. If hitler had claimed to be jewish, should he have been given a traditional jewish burial?

Hitler didn't claim to be Jewish.

ForeverChiefs58
05-02-2011, 06:39 PM
Hitler didn't claim to be Jewish.

Well, that's a good thing. I guess we are lucky OBL didn't claim to be from Mars, cause a martian burial would be an expensive funeral.

|Zach|
05-02-2011, 06:47 PM
Well, that's a good thing. I guess we are lucky OBL didn't claim to be from Mars, cause a martian burial would be an expensive funeral.

:facepalm:

'Hamas' Jenkins
05-02-2011, 07:21 PM
By giving him a traditional burial, but doing it at sea, you also establish that you were willing to do something for him that he wouldn't have done for you. It's a deft move both symbolically, for the tolerance, and tactically, because it eliminates a burial site as a possible grounds of remembrance.

bishop_74
05-02-2011, 07:25 PM
By giving him a traditional burial, but doing it at sea, you also establish that you were willing to do something for him that he wouldn't have done for you. It's a deft move both symbolically, for the tolerance, and tactically, because it eliminates a burial site as a possible grounds of remembrance.

The gesture is wasted... his followers want everyone that is not Muslim slaughtered.

|Zach|
05-02-2011, 07:31 PM
The gesture is wasted... his followers want everyone that is not Muslim slaughtered.

Other people's standards do not dictate ours.

DeezNutz
05-02-2011, 07:34 PM
By giving him a traditional burial, but doing it at sea, you also establish that you were willing to do something for him that he wouldn't have done for you. It's a deft move both symbolically, for the tolerance, and tactically, because it eliminates a burial site as a possible grounds of remembrance.

While I agree with both of your points here, his place of death can function as the latter. This was an impossible thing to prevent.

Hog Farmer
05-02-2011, 07:41 PM
He died the same day as Hitler, May 1, I hope the sharks have a full belly bye now.

gblowfish
05-02-2011, 07:50 PM
The gesture is wasted... his followers want everyone that is not Muslim slaughtered.

Why sink to their level?
Besides, he's fish food.
Winning!

ForeverChiefs58
05-02-2011, 09:04 PM
By giving him a traditional burial, but doing it at sea, you also establish that you were willing to do something for him that he wouldn't have done for you. It's a deft move both symbolically, for the tolerance, and tactically, because it eliminates a burial site as a possible grounds of remembrance.

Yeah, but was OBL a true muslim? Did he represent that faith? If the answer is no then no one should worry about what kind of religious burial he had or how fast he was buried.

The same exact thing was said about hitler's tomb becoming a Neo-Nazi shrine and so his remains were destroyed and scattered.

I just find it odd we gave OBL a traditional muslim burial when he was supposedly no more muslim than hitler was. If I was a normal peace loving muslim I would be offended they treated him like one as well even in death.

I would imagine most would agree mass murderers should not be cared for even in death. I just find it odd we would wash and care for his dirty rotten body.

They didn't even have to say anything, they could have just said his body was "taken care of" and left it at that.

redshirt32
05-02-2011, 09:27 PM
I found out about 3 am this morning surfing my phone it was posted on CP had to check again on the news network USA USA USA !!!!
Having served onboard CVN 70 i was like hell Fking yea
The first time i set foot on The Carl vinson was by plane but at least i walked on the flight deck usama was carried and then dumped GO Navy!!!!!!!!
Thanks to those involved many thanks

bishop_74
05-02-2011, 09:41 PM
Other people's standards do not dictate ours.

Why sink to their level?
Besides, he's fish food.
Winning!

Agreed. I just don't think anyone should be worried about how they might feel or if they will retaliate. They hate western culture with every fiber of their being. This "gesture" of respect will not change anything.

CaliforniaChief
05-02-2011, 09:47 PM
This event is one within a much bigger picture that the Administration is trying to paint...that our war isn't against Islam but against terrorists. Like I said earlier, perception is much more powerful than reality. It's a good move by the Administration. Business-like and effective.

Iconic
05-02-2011, 09:55 PM
By giving him a traditional burial, but doing it at sea, you also establish that you were willing to do something for him that he wouldn't have done for you. It's a deft move both symbolically, for the tolerance, and tactically, because it eliminates a burial site as a possible grounds of remembrance.


He wasn't given a proper Islamic burial.... :doh!:

LiveSteam
05-02-2011, 09:55 PM
:popcorn:

GloryDayz
05-02-2011, 09:58 PM
I'll bet there are some 47 disappointed virgins now. I bet half are claiming they are just reformed hookers... They held off, only to have to do that clown..

Epic fail on their part(s)...

Guru
05-02-2011, 09:59 PM
I hope it wasn't some civil burial. I just want hear his ass was dumped for the sharks.

GloryDayz
05-02-2011, 10:00 PM
And they should have given him a Jewish burial... That might have started WWIII!!!

Guru
05-02-2011, 10:02 PM
Personally, we should have launched him into space where he wouldn't even be able to rot.

ForeverChiefs58
05-02-2011, 10:05 PM
He wasn't given a proper Islamic burial.... :doh!:

Might not have been proper like buried with his head facing mecca, but was traditional in that his body was washed clean, wrapped in a sheet and disposed before the next prayer.

|Zach|
05-02-2011, 10:11 PM
Clark Griswold just left Aunt Edna in a folding chair in the rain.

'Hamas' Jenkins
05-02-2011, 10:11 PM
Yeah, but was OBL a true muslim? Did he represent that faith? If the answer is no then no one should worry about what kind of religious burial he had or how fast he was buried.

The same exact thing was said about hitler's tomb becoming a Neo-Nazi shrine and so his remains were destroyed and scattered.

I just find it odd we gave OBL a traditional muslim burial when he was supposedly no more muslim than hitler was. If I was a normal peace loving muslim I would be offended they treated him like one as well even in death.

I would imagine most would agree mass murderers should not be cared for even in death. I just find it odd we would wash and care for his dirty rotten body.

They didn't even have to say anything, they could have just said his body was "taken care of" and left it at that.

Whether or not you consider him a proper Muslim is immaterial. The point is that by giving him a proper or semi-proper burial, you delegitimize people who say that the United States continues to disrespect Muslims and Islamic tradition.

|Zach|
05-02-2011, 10:32 PM
Whether or not you consider him a proper Muslim is immaterial. The point is that by giving him a proper or semi-proper burial, you delegitimize people who say that the United States continues to disrespect Muslims and Islamic tradition.

Not to mention declaring who and who is not a proper muslim sounds about as fun as declaring who is and is not a proper Christian.

Talk about a no sum game.

ForeverChiefs58
05-02-2011, 10:38 PM
Whether or not you consider him a proper Muslim is immaterial. The point is that by giving him a proper or semi-proper burial, you delegitimize people who say that the United States continues to disrespect Muslims and Islamic tradition.

I can see that. :thumb:

Hog Farmer
05-03-2011, 07:10 AM
Fox news said this morning he was wrapped in a weighted white sheet. I was kinda worried he my float so now I feel a little better now.

Iowanian
05-03-2011, 07:32 AM
I hope every person on the Vinson farted on his corpse before Osama Been Rotten was fed to the turtles.

JD10367
05-03-2011, 07:34 AM
I wonder what Belichick would say about Osama? I bet he'd say he's day-to-day and will be listed as "Probable (Head Injury)".

InChiefsHell
05-03-2011, 07:47 AM
I have to say again, this is not a bad thing. I also don't think that the 'at sea" burial was some new idea by the Obama administration. It was something the military was settled on a long time ago in the case that we might kill the guy. This isn't something that Obama came up with (he's not that smart). Obama for once was smart and did what Bush had been doing all along, and lo and behold it paid off. The burial at sea was already in the cards. Make no mistake, Bush would have done the same. But the burial at sea pissed off the radical clerics, because burial at sea is not permitted by Muslim tradition except in extreme need, like if a guy dies at sea. So, even though he was given a "muslim burial" he really wasn't given one. It was more a slap in the face, afaiac. Good move by the Americans.

CaliforniaChief
05-03-2011, 08:34 AM
I wonder what Belichick would say about Osama? I bet he'd say he's day-to-day and will be listed as "Probable (Head Injury)".

ROFL

seclark
05-03-2011, 08:43 AM
yeah, i think i'm just going to pass on these now.

boogblaster
05-03-2011, 10:45 AM
wont be able to eat the fish for 15 years now ...

jAZ
05-03-2011, 10:59 AM
Obama for once was smart and did what Bush had been doing all along, and lo and behold it paid off.

Brilliant revisionist (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A62618-2002Apr16) history.

Dave Lane
05-03-2011, 11:04 AM
Well that makes sense. First thing I've heard that does.

You should try to listen to other people sometimes. This won't happen as much then.

Dave Lane
05-03-2011, 11:18 AM
I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02

InChiefsHell
05-03-2011, 12:48 PM
Brilliant revisionist (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A62618-2002Apr16) history.
Um, it's been widely reported that the information used to nail Bin Laden came from the evil interrogation techniques that Bush employed and you all (and Obama) decried...why hasn't Odumba pulled out of Afghanistan? Why hasn't he closed Gitmo? Basically what has he changed from the Bush years? Nada. That's why he got Bin Laden. If he had been running things his way, we would not be having this conversation.

Pitt Gorilla
05-03-2011, 12:52 PM
Um, it's been widely reported that the information used to nail Bin Laden came from the evil interrogation techniques that Bush employed and you all (and Obama) decried...why hasn't Odumba pulled out of Afghanistan? Why hasn't he closed Gitmo? Basically what has he changed from the Bush years? Nada. That's why he got Bin Laden. If he had been running things his way, we would not be having this conversation.Do you have a citation for this (the information came from the techniques)? Everything that I've read has noted the information was divulged after the techniques had been suspended.

InChiefsHell
05-03-2011, 12:54 PM
I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02

From http://www.911myths.com/html/ignored.html

That hasn’t stopped the detractors, though, who also cite these similar Bush quotes:

"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."

"I am truly not that concerned about him."
G.W. Bush
http://www.50bushflipflops.com/Lecture_Outline/lesson1.html

These sound impressive, until you look at the source. Then you discover that the first quote doesn’t exist, while as with Myers, the second omits a considerable amount of context:

Q Mr. President, in your speeches now you rarely talk or mention Osama bin Laden. Why is that? Also, can you tell the American people if you have any more information, if you know if he is dead or alive? Final part -- deep in your heart, don't you truly believe that until you find out if he is dead or alive, you won't really eliminate the threat of --

THE PRESIDENT: Deep in my heart I know the man is on the run, if he's alive at all. Who knows if he's hiding in some cave or not; we haven't heard from him in a long time. And the idea of focusing on one person is -- really indicates to me people don't understand the scope of the mission.

Terror is bigger than one person. And he's just -- he's a person who's now been marginalized. His network, his host government has been destroyed. He's the ultimate parasite who found weakness, exploited it, and met his match. He is -- as I mentioned in my speech, I do mention the fact that this is a fellow who is willing to commit youngsters to their death and he, himself, tries to hide -- if, in fact, he's hiding at all.

So I don't know where he is. You know, I just don't spend that much time on him, Kelly, to be honest with you. I'm more worried about making sure that our soldiers are well-supplied; that the strategy is clear; that the coalition is strong; that when we find enemy bunched up like we did in Shahikot Mountains, that the military has all the support it needs to go in and do the job, which they did.

And there will be other battles in Afghanistan. There's going to be other struggles like Shahikot, and I'm just as confident about the outcome of those future battles as I was about Shahikot, where our soldiers are performing brilliantly. We're tough, we're strong, they're well-equipped. We have a good strategy. We are showing the world we know how to fight a guerrilla war with conventional means.

Q But don't you believe that the threat that bin Laden posed won't truly be eliminated until he is found either dead or alive?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, as I say, we haven't heard much from him. And I wouldn't necessarily say he's at the center of any command structure. And, again, I don't know where he is. I -- I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him. I know he is on the run. I was concerned about him, when he had taken over a country. I was concerned about the fact that he was basically running Afghanistan and calling the shots for the Taliban.

But once we set out the policy and started executing the plan, he became -- we shoved him out more and more on the margins. He has no place to train his al Qaeda killers anymore. And if we -- excuse me for a minute -- and if we find a training camp, we'll take care of it. Either we will or our friends will. That's one of the things -- part of the new phase that's becoming apparent to the American people is that we're working closely with other governments to deny sanctuary, or training, or a place to hide, or a place to raise money.

And we've got more work to do. See, that's the thing the American people have got to understand, that we've only been at this six months. This is going to be a long struggle. I keep saying that; I don't know whether you all believe me or not. But time will show you that it's going to take a long time to achieve this objective. And I can assure you, I am not going to blink. And I'm not going to get tired. Because I know what is at stake. And history has called us to action, and I am going to seize this moment for the good of the world, for peace in the world and for freedom.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html

InChiefsHell
05-03-2011, 12:55 PM
Do you have a citation for this (the information came from the techniques)? Everything that I've read has noted the information was divulged after the techniques had been suspended.

Not offhand. I admit I'm hearing these reports from interviews on radio shows which you would not find credible. I'll see if I can find some other sources.

Calcountry
05-03-2011, 12:56 PM
So they said he was dead. Obama does an 11:30pm speech about it. They did the DNA test immediately. No pictures or videos have been released. His body is immediately thrown in the ocean.

Ok. Got it.If my pres says it, I believe.

jAZ
05-03-2011, 12:59 PM
Um, it's been widely reported that the information used to nail Bin Laden came from the evil interrogation techniques that Bush employed and you all (and Obama) decried...why hasn't Odumba pulled out of Afghanistan? Why hasn't he closed Gitmo? Basically what has he changed from the Bush years? Nada. That's why he got Bin Laden. If he had been running things his way, we would not be having this conversation.

Brilliant revisionist (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110502/ap_on_re_us/us_bin_laden_hunt_for_bin_laden) history.

InChiefsHell
05-03-2011, 01:01 PM
Do you have a citation for this (the information came from the techniques)? Everything that I've read has noted the information was divulged after the techniques had been suspended.

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/05/02/rumsfeld-bin-laden-gitmo/

Basically they (the writers) keep calling it torture...but regardless, it seems the information was gleaned over many years. Not just since Obama took office.

InChiefsHell
05-03-2011, 01:02 PM
Brilliant revisionist (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110502/ap_on_re_us/us_bin_laden_hunt_for_bin_laden) history.

What ever makes you feel better.

Dave Lane
05-03-2011, 01:05 PM
http://thinkprogress.org/2011/05/02/rumsfeld-bin-laden-gitmo/

Basically they (the writers) keep calling it torture...but regardless, it seems the information was gleaned over many years. Not just since Obama took office.

So you admit this is Obama and no other presidents call. And he should get the credit? Good then we are in agreement.

And there is no context needed for GWs quote.

RockChalk
05-03-2011, 01:12 PM
Motion to move this to the DC lounge...

Misplaced_Chiefs_Fan
05-03-2011, 01:17 PM
Motion to move this to the DC lounge...

Seconded

Mr. Plow
05-03-2011, 01:39 PM
Thirdeded.

DaFace
05-03-2011, 02:08 PM
Yeah, unfortunately, this one's gone past the point of no return. The other one's not too far gone yet, so I'll leave it in here for the time being at least. Hopefully we can keep it that way.

Mr. Laz
05-03-2011, 02:16 PM
Yeah, unfortunately, this one's gone past the point of no return. The other one's not too far gone yet, so I'll leave it in here for the time being at least. Hopefully we can keep it that way.
hey ... thread lasted a lot longer in the lounge than i expected.

normally they don't make it past an hour :p

gblowfish
05-03-2011, 03:33 PM
So who's the douche nozzle (or douche nozzles) that pushed this thread over the edge and into the DC?

jAZ
05-03-2011, 05:22 PM
Obama for once was smart and did what Bush had been doing all along, and lo and behold it paid off.
Still more revisionist (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/08/washington/08intel.html) history.

jAZ
05-03-2011, 05:23 PM
So who's the douche nozzle (or douche nozzles) that pushed this thread over the edge and into the DC?

Doh! I don't know if I was the leader or a follower. Sorry if I had anything to do with it.

I'm done here.

Donger
05-03-2011, 05:26 PM
Brilliant revisionist (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110502/ap_on_re_us/us_bin_laden_hunt_for_bin_laden) history.

Did you even read the article you linked?

In a secret CIA prison in Eastern Europe years ago, al-Qaida's No. 3 leader, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, gave authorities the nicknames of several of bin Laden's couriers, four former U.S. intelligence officials said.

and

The revelation that intelligence gleaned from the CIA's so-called black sites helped kill bin Laden was seen as vindication for many intelligence officials who have been repeatedly investigated and criticized for their involvement in a program that involved the harshest interrogation methods in U.S. history.


"We got beat up for it, but those efforts led to this great day," said Marty Martin, a retired CIA officer who for years led the hunt for bin Laden.

mlyonsd
05-03-2011, 05:55 PM
Doh! I don't know if I was the leader or a follower. Sorry if I had anything to do with it.

I'm done here.

Hey look, it's NORM.

jAZ
05-03-2011, 07:01 PM
Did you even read the article you linked?

In a secret CIA prison in Eastern Europe years ago, al-Qaida's No. 3 leader, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, gave authorities the nicknames of several of bin Laden's couriers, four former U.S. intelligence officials said.

and

The revelation that intelligence gleaned from the CIA's so-called black sites helped kill bin Laden was seen as vindication for many intelligence officials who have been repeatedly investigated and criticized for their involvement in a program that involved the harshest interrogation methods in U.S. history.


"We got beat up for it, but those efforts led to this great day," said Marty Martin, a retired CIA officer who for years led the hunt for bin Laden.

Yes, you should consider doing so as well.

"Mohammed did not reveal the names while being subjected to the simulated drowning technique known as waterboarding, former officials said. He identified them many months later under standard interrogation"

Donger
05-03-2011, 07:04 PM
Yes, you should consider doing so as well.

"Mohammed did not reveal the names while being subjected to the simulated drowning technique known as waterboarding, former officials said. He identified them many months later under standard interrogation"


LMAO

Do you think that KSM forgot about the experience? Do you think that perhaps he was threatened with having it repeated if he didn't squeal?

Anyway, I trust that you were/are opposed to the black, secret CIA prisons?

Donger
05-03-2011, 07:17 PM
http://thepage.time.com/2011/05/03/panetta-public-likely-to-see-obl-picture/

Huh.

On the role of interrogation:

BRIAN WILLIAMS: Can you confirm that it was as a result of water boarding that we learned what we needed to learn to go after Bin Laden?

LEON PANETTA: Brian, in the intelligence business you work from a lot of sources of information and that was true here… It's a little difficult to say it was due just to one source of information that we got… I think some of the detainees clearly were, you know, they used these enhanced interrogation techniques against some of these detainees. But I'm also saying that, you know, the debate about whether we would have gotten the same information through other approaches I think is always going to be an open question.

BRIAN WILLIAMS: So finer point, one final time, enhanced interrogation techniques -- which has always been kind of a handy euphemism in these post-9/11 years -- that includes water boarding?

LEON PANETTA: That's correct.

patteeu
05-03-2011, 08:12 PM
Whether or not you consider him a proper Muslim is immaterial. The point is that by giving him a proper or semi-proper burial, you delegitimize people who say that the United States continues to disrespect Muslims and Islamic tradition.

So you'd be in the camp of people who think Barack Obama should have released his long form birth certificate much sooner, right? You know, to delegitimize people who say he wasn't born in Hawaii.

patteeu
05-03-2011, 08:33 PM
Brilliant revisionist (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A62618-2002Apr16) history.

Brilliant revisionist (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110502/ap_on_re_us/us_bin_laden_hunt_for_bin_laden) history.

Still more revisionist (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/08/washington/08intel.html) history.

At least you're labeling your BS these days.

Hog Farmer
05-03-2011, 09:20 PM
They said KSM was waterboarded at least 168 times . HaHa!

BucEyedPea
05-03-2011, 10:31 PM
"Mohammed did not reveal the names while being subjected to the simulated drowning technique known as waterboarding, former officials said. He identified them many months later under standard interrogation"


Rumsfeld said that on Hannity tonight too. He also said only 3 AQ ever gave up anything up under the same technique. Most of the time it doesn't work. No one was wb'd at Gitmo he also said.

patteeu
05-03-2011, 10:44 PM
Rumsfeld said that on Hannity tonight too. He also said only 3 AQ ever gave up anything up under the same technique. Most of the time it doesn't work. No one was wb'd at Gitmo he also said.

1. Waterboarding doesn't stop having an effect on you when they stop pouring the water.

2. There are several harsh techniques besides waterboarding.

3. There were only 3 detainees subjected to waterboarding so 3 for 3 sounds like a pretty good batting average.

4. We've known no one was waterboarded at Gitmo for a long time.

jAZ
05-04-2011, 02:15 AM
LMAO

Do you think that KSM forgot about the experience? Do you think that perhaps he was threatened with having it repeated if he didn't squeal?

Anyway, I trust that you were/are opposed to the black, secret CIA prisons?

This is why DC is pointless. You are among the smarter, most contemplative posters in here.

ICH posted a false rumor and I responded by posting a direct link to the article showing it's false. You reply and in doing so got caught dead to rights selectively cropping out a misleading quote from the article I linked. And when confronted with the money quote that you left out, you can't even bring yourself to acknowledge your oversight or deliberate manipulation.

It would be completely typical in any normal off-line conversation to just own up to the fact that you made a mistake and I in fact did correctly post an article directly rejecting ICH's false claim. Instead you throw out a ROFL and try to change the discussion from "the information used to nail Bin Laden came from the evil interrogation techniques that Bush employed".

When the smart people in DC don't have the integrity to own up to the most obvious mistake, there is absolutely no point in spending time trying to thoughtfully debate more nuanced points of opinion.

jAZ
05-04-2011, 02:19 AM
http://thepage.time.com/2011/05/03/panetta-public-likely-to-see-obl-picture/

Huh.

On the role of interrogation:

BRIAN WILLIAMS: Can you confirm that it was as a result of water boarding that we learned what we needed to learn to go after Bin Laden?

LEON PANETTA: Brian, in the intelligence business you work from a lot of sources of information and that was true here… It's a little difficult to say it was due just to one source of information that we got… I think some of the detainees clearly were, you know, they used these enhanced interrogation techniques against some of these detainees. But I'm also saying that, you know, the debate about whether we would have gotten the same information through other approaches I think is always going to be an open question.

BRIAN WILLIAMS: So finer point, one final time, enhanced interrogation techniques -- which has always been kind of a handy euphemism in these post-9/11 years -- that includes water boarding?

LEON PANETTA: That's correct.

Yes, months earlier. But it was the standard interrogation that directly elicited the answers that lead to bin Laden. You hate that fact for some reason.

jAZ
05-04-2011, 02:20 AM
1. Waterboarding doesn't stop having an effect on you when they stop pouring the water.

2. There are several harsh techniques besides waterboarding.

3. There were only 3 detainees subjected to waterboarding so 3 for 3 sounds like a pretty good batting average.

4. We've known no one was waterboarded at Gitmo for a long time.

"He identified them many months later under standard interrogation". You must hate that fact too.

stevieray
05-04-2011, 05:16 AM
Yes, months earlier. But it was the standard interrogation that directly elicited the answers that lead to bin Laden. You hate that fact for some reason.how we got the info doesn't make a damn bit of difference....but it is funny watching you come back and joining defleckshun in what basically amounts to calling someone a rapist, and then acting as if it's the truth.

....it's extremely transparent.

Radar Chief
05-04-2011, 06:31 AM
"He identified them many months later under standard interrogation". You must hate that fact too.

After being water boarded. You must hate that fact too. :rolleyes:

NewChief
05-04-2011, 06:52 AM
When the smart people in DC don't have the integrity to own up to the most obvious mistake, there is absolutely no point in spending time trying to thoughtfully debate more nuanced points of opinion.

I'll preface my reply by saying that I haven't followed the exchange in question between you and Donger, so I can't comment on that. I do want to second the general sentiment of your post, though.

This has pretty much been my feeling here for a while. Even the people who I respect and feel are better informed or smarter than me often demonstrate a lack of honesty and integrity (trading it for partisan gamesmanship) that makes trying to really have discussion in here pointless.

Huffmeister
05-04-2011, 07:00 AM
I'll preface my reply by saying that I haven't followed the exchange in question between you and Donger, so I can't comment on that. I do want to second the general sentiment of your post, though.

This has pretty much been my feeling here for a while. Even the people who I respect and feel are better informed or smarter than me often demonstrate a lack of honesty and integrity (trading it for partisan gamesmanship) that makes trying to really have discussion in here pointless.
Couldn't it be that they just have different point of view? Just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't mean that they must be stupid or dishonest.

stevieray
05-04-2011, 07:18 AM
Couldn't it be that they just have different point of view? Just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't mean that they must be stupid or dishonest.


....it's part of the reason the left comes across as elitist.

dirk digler
05-04-2011, 08:01 AM
Couldn't it be that they just have different point of view? Just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't mean that they must be stupid or dishonest.

I think what he means is people ignore clear facts and just want to play partisan games.

You don't have to look any farther than the birth certificate issue or 9/11 truthers.

Huffmeister
05-04-2011, 08:23 AM
I think what he means is people ignore clear facts and just want to play partisan games.

You don't have to look any farther than the birth certificate issue or 9/11 truthers.

You don't think it's possible for two people to look at exactly the same facts, yet have two different points of view about the conclusion?

dirk digler
05-04-2011, 08:28 AM
You don't think it's possible for two people to look at exactly the same facts, yet have two different points of view about the conclusion?

In some cases sure. In the 2 examples I provided the evidence is so overwhelming that only stupid\dishonest people would argue the opposite view point.

Donger
05-04-2011, 08:30 AM
Yes, months earlier. But it was the standard interrogation that directly elicited the answers that lead to bin Laden. You hate that fact for some reason.

I don't hate that fact. I love that fact.

I also acknowledge the fact that he was waterboarded before. You really don't think that they used that fact against him? You really don't think that they threatened to used it again if he didn't squeal? You really don't think that KSM remembered being waterboarded and perhaps didn't want it to happen again?

Huffmeister
05-04-2011, 08:32 AM
In some cases sure. In the 2 examples I provided the evidence is so overwhelming that only stupid\dishonest people would argue the opposite view point.

In those cases (truthers/birthers), I would lean towards mental illness rather than stupidity or dishonesty.

dirk digler
05-04-2011, 08:42 AM
I don't hate that fact. I love that fact.

I also acknowledge the fact that he was waterboarded before. You really don't think that they used that fact against him? You really don't think that they threatened to used it again if he didn't squeal? You really don't think that KSM remembered being waterboarded and perhaps didn't want it to happen again?

I would say after about the first 50 times he was probably thinking good I get to wash my face today.

The fact is he never gave up the information which goes against the whole idea of waterboarding and EI.

dirk digler
05-04-2011, 08:43 AM
In those cases (truthers/birthers), I would lean towards mental illness rather than stupidity or dishonesty.

Couldn't agree more :thumb: Just look at the poster above you for example #1 :D

jAZ
05-04-2011, 08:45 AM
After being water boarded. You must hate that fact too. :rolleyes:

After water boarding failed to elicit the information.

Donger
05-04-2011, 08:45 AM
I would say after about the first 50 times he was probably thinking good I get to wash my face today.

The fact is he never gave up the information which goes against the whole idea of waterboarding and EI.

Dirk, he did give up the information and he did so after he was subjected to EITs.

Donger
05-04-2011, 08:46 AM
After water boarding failed to elicit the information.

So, it's only effective if he squeals during the actual procedure?

jAZ
05-04-2011, 08:50 AM
I'll preface my reply by saying that I haven't followed the exchange in question between you and Donger, so I can't comment on that. I do want to second the general sentiment of your post, though.

This has pretty much been my feeling here for a while. Even the people who I respect and feel are better informed or smarter than me often demonstrate a lack of honesty and integrity (trading it for partisan gamesmanship) that makes trying to really have discussion in here pointless.

I posted this in a thread calling me out for running away from "playing defense".


Wow... I'm flattered, I guess.

I'll make a brief return to share my side of the exchange I had with BigRedChief back in November as an FYI to anyone who cares (and as far as I am concerned, no one should). To be clear, it's not about personal attacks as patteeu points out.

First post:

I just realized one day a couple of months ago that the DC forum had taken on the personality of the those August town halls and I got disgusted with the entire experience.

That combined with the fact that I've long been incredibly frustrated that some of the smartest, most knowledgable posters... the ones who should be able to provide the best discussions... have generally used their ability to play games with posting trying to make it entirely a battle of whits without much honest application of reason or facts.

That's been frustating to me for a long time. And when those same posters failed to object to the worst of the "town hall" type discussions... it sorta pushed me past my limit, and I just quietly left.

Second post:

I never really had a problem looking past the worst posters in DC. My problem is that the worst posters seemed to expose that the supposed best posters weren't much better, just slicker and less honest.

I just really hate that. Their making excuses for the teaparty crap that seemed to flooded the DC just made me realize there was no reason to spend my time talking to them about these things anymore.

I just sorta walked away.

The mere suggestion that I'm hiding from anything, even by some of the more respected posters on here, is pretty much exactly why I left. The 2004 election was far far more challenging time politically than any time in the last 6 months.

And I left this board when things were far better politically than they are today.

I've spent years here through all sorts of political ups and downs. In that time you'd think anyone who gave a crap about the truth of the matter would admit that I have never walked away from defending my views. It's utter nonsense to suggest such.

That lie about me so effectively illustrates why I left, I don't really have much more to add. Anyone who's watched me post here for nearly a decade knows that I don't run from any discussion. Deeply offensive and wildly dishonest to argue that I do.

dirk digler
05-04-2011, 08:51 AM
Dirk, he did give up the information and he did so after he was subjected to EITs.

In KSM's case he didn't

But a closer look at prisoner interrogations suggests that the harsh techniques played a small role at most in identifying Bin Laden’s trusted courier and exposing his hide-out. One detainee who apparently was subjected to some tough treatment provided a crucial description of the courier, according to current and former officials briefed on the interrogations. But two prisoners who underwent some of the harshest treatment — including Khalid Shaikh Mohammed (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/m/khalid_shaikh_mohammed/index.html?inline=nyt-per), who was waterboarded 183 times — repeatedly misled their interrogators about the courier’s identity.

Donger
05-04-2011, 08:55 AM
In KSM's case he didn't

Your own quote states that EITs "played a small part." That is acknowledgment that they had an effect. And, again, you can't dismiss teh fact that he was waterboarded and perhaps didn't want it to start again.

jAZ
05-04-2011, 09:00 AM
So, it's only effective if he squeals during the actual procedure?

He can't "squeal() during the actual procedure". He has a rag in his mouth.

But trying to claim success for water-boarding when the information comes out months later after a complete change in interrogation strategy... that's as ridiculous as someone on the other side trying to claim credit for traditional interrogation when a prisoner confesses some fact shortly after water-boarding because he underwent traditional interrogation months earlier.

It's just mind-blowing the depth of dishonesty that you and others will go to to defend even the most overtly false beliefs.

Donger
05-04-2011, 09:02 AM
This is why DC is pointless. You are among the smarter, most contemplative posters in here.

ICH posted a false rumor and I responded by posting a direct link to the article showing it's false. You reply and in doing so got caught dead to rights selectively cropping out a misleading quote from the article I linked. And when confronted with the money quote that you left out, you can't even bring yourself to acknowledge your oversight or deliberate manipulation.

It would be completely typical in any normal off-line conversation to just own up to the fact that you made a mistake and I in fact did correctly post an article directly rejecting ICH's false claim. Instead you throw out a ROFL and try to change the discussion from "the information used to nail Bin Laden came from the evil interrogation techniques that Bush employed".

When the smart people in DC don't have the integrity to own up to the most obvious mistake, there is absolutely no point in spending time trying to thoughtfully debate more nuanced points of opinion.

Those quotes which I posted are referring to the black sites overseas. I admit that I presumed that you opposed them. If that is incorrect, I apologize for my assumption. Did.do you oppose the black sites?

Donger
05-04-2011, 09:03 AM
He can't "squeal() during the actual procedure". He has a rag in his mouth.

But trying to claim success for water-boarding when the information comes out months later after a complete change in interrogation strategy... that's as ridiculous as someone on the other side trying to claim credit for traditional interrogation when a prisoner confesses some fact shortly after water-boarding because he underwent traditional interrogation months earlier.

It's just mind-blowing the depth of dishonesty that you and others will go to to defend even the most overtly false beliefs.

Well, yeah. How about right after the rag is removed? How long after the rag is removed would be considered by you to be indicative of "See! Waterboarding works!"?

And, how do you know that he wasn't threatened with more waterboarding? You will acknowledge that it is supposed to be rather unpleasant, right? You will acknowledge that he surely remembered the experience, right?

Radar Chief
05-04-2011, 09:04 AM
After water boarding failed to elicit the information.

Proof that KSM was cooperating pre-WBing? Otherwise your statement means next to nothing.

dirk digler
05-04-2011, 09:08 AM
Your own quote states that EITs "played a small part." That is acknowledgment that they had an effect. And, again, you can't dismiss teh fact that he was waterboarded and perhaps didn't want it to start again.

If that was the case he would have given up the info. He continued to lie about it even after the waterboarding stopped.

The whole point of waterboarding\EI is to get actionable intel in a timely manner is it not? If so then it failed at least in this case.

Donger
05-04-2011, 09:11 AM
If that was the case he would have given up the info. He continued to lie about it even after the waterboarding stopped.

The whole point of waterboarding\EI is to get actionable intel in a timely manner is it not? If so then it failed at least in this case.

He did give up the info. What changed for him that made him decide to finally squeal? Guilty conscience?

I don't know where you are getting the "actionable intel in a timely manner" from.

dirk digler
05-04-2011, 09:14 AM
Proof that KSM was cooperating pre-WBing? Otherwise your statement means next to nothing.

I don't believe they gave him the opportunity. (not that it would have mattered any)

He was captured March 1, 2003 and was waterboard 183 that year alone which means he was basically waterboarded everyday because they stopped in the fall of 2003.

jAZ
05-04-2011, 09:17 AM
Your own quote states that EITs "played a small part."

If people on the right approached this discussion with "EIT might have played a small part" we wouldn't be having this discussion. That's an honest version of the discussion we are having.

Instead they have spent the last few days trying to rewrite history based on this this event and in the face of overtly contradictory facts no less.

dirk digler
05-04-2011, 09:20 AM
He did give up the info. What changed for him that made him decide to finally squeal? Guilty conscience?

I don't know where you are getting the "actionable intel in a timely manner" from.

He gave up a fake name as did others that weren't waterboarded.

Because that is the whole reason for it

waterboarding is quick and efficient:

Rather than spending months interrogating a suspect, waterboarding is quick and efficient. According to the Independent, CIA waterboarding 'broke suspect after 35 seconds'[6] Abu Zabaida was waterboarded for a total of 35 seconds, and after the experience, instantly revealed everything.

jAZ
05-04-2011, 09:32 AM
Those quotes which I posted are referring to the black sites overseas. I admit that I presumed that you opposed them. If that is incorrect, I apologize for my assumption. Did.do you oppose the black sites?

I know what you were trying to do. You refused to engage directly the point being discussed, and instead posted a pair of quotes that you wanted to use to try to pivot around and obfuscate the discussion without conceding anything. It's a 2nd rate, dishonest debate game and a big part of why this forum is such garbage.

You responded to a specific discussion, largely ignored the fact that I was right, ICH was wrong, I had the evidence, he had nothing... and instead of acknowledging the overtly obvious facts of the matter, you try to pivot to a different point not being debated. All the while, not saying that that is what you are doing (ie, "you might be right, but what about").

All the while, including in your quotes a reference to the original point being debated ("a program that involved the harshest interrogation methods in U.S. history") and then immediately posting follow-up quote again referencing the initial discussion ("they used these enhanced interrogation techniques against some of these detainees").

Instead of having a willingness to engage the facts on an honest level, you try to give yourself the rhetorical flexibility to run away from the point being discussed if you feel like there might be some rhetorical weakness elsewhere.

It's deeply dishonest tactics in lieu of a quality discussion about different beliefs.

orange
05-04-2011, 09:32 AM
I also acknowledge the fact that he was waterboarded before. You really don't think that they used that fact against him? You really don't think that they threatened to used it again if he didn't squeal? You really don't think that KSM remembered being waterboarded and perhaps didn't want it to happen again?

You really don't think that his being moved to a different place and being turned over to different people underscored the fact that things were different now?

Related - John McCain and others will never be un-tortured. Should they be disqualified from high office?


btw - why is this in a different thread? How many threads on this topic are required?

Donger
05-04-2011, 09:33 AM
If people on the right approached this discussion with "EIT might have played a small part" we wouldn't be having this discussion. That's an honest version of the discussion we are having.

Instead they have spent the last few days trying to rewrite history based on this this event and in the face of overtly contradictory facts no less.

I suspect that it played a larger part than some think, but that's fine. If it played a small part, have you changed your opinion on its usage?

Donger
05-04-2011, 09:35 AM
He gave up a fake name as did others that weren't waterboarded.

Because that is the whole reason for it

Okay, so waterboarding "didn't" work on KSM but it did on others? And, you are okay with it being used on the others?

jAZ
05-04-2011, 09:36 AM
He gave up a fake name as did others that weren't waterboarded.

Because that is the whole reason for it

Which was the justification given for needing to authorize water-boarding. It was the ticking time-bomb argument. 183 times, months later after standard interrogation and 8 years all demonstrate that this is no "ticking time bomb scenario".

orange
05-04-2011, 09:38 AM
I don't believe they gave him the opportunity. (not that it would have mattered any)

He was captured March 1, 2003 and was waterboard 183 that year alone which means he was basically waterboarded everyday because they stopped in the fall of 2003.

This number is true but misleading. The 183 is the total number of times water was poured on him; it was not the number of actual sessions; each session had multiple pourings.

Donger
05-04-2011, 09:39 AM
I know what you were trying to do. You refused to engage directly the point being discussed, and instead posted a pair of quotes that you wanted to use to try to pivot around and obfuscate the discussion without conceding anything. It's a 2nd rate, dishonest debate game and a big part of why this forum is such garbage.

You responded to a specific discussion, largely ignored the fact that I was right, ICH was wrong, I had the evidence, he had nothing... and instead of acknowledging the overtly obvious facts of the matter, you try to pivot to a different point not being debated. All the while, not saying that that is what you are doing (ie, "you might be right, but what about").

All the while, including in your quotes a reference to the original point being debated ("a program that involved the harshest interrogation methods in U.S. history") and then immediately posting follow-up quote again referencing the initial discussion ("they used these enhanced interrogation techniques against some of these detainees").

Instead of having a willingness to engage the facts on an honest level, you try to give yourself the rhetorical flexibility to run away from the point being discussed if you feel like there might be some rhetorical weakness elsewhere.

It's deeply dishonest tactics in lieu of a quality discussion about different beliefs.

No, like I said, I was specifically referring to black sites. If you wish to engage me directly on another topic, I'll be happy to do so.

You are aware that Obama said this about the CIA prisons?

“our ideals give us the strength and moral high ground” to combat terrorism

I wonder if he still thinks that.

jAZ
05-04-2011, 09:40 AM
I suspect that it played a larger part than some think, but that's fine. If it played a small part, have you changed your opinion on its usage?

Not remotely.


It's still illegal torture.
This clearly wasn't a ticking time bomb situation.
The information came out by standard interrogation methods.
We still only win this war by driving a wedge between the radical nut jobs and broader Islamic world.
Western torture places the wedge between the West and the broader Islamic world.

Donger
05-04-2011, 09:42 AM
Not remotely.


It's still illegal torture.
This clearly wasn't a ticking time bomb situation.
The information came out by standard interrogation methods.
We still only win this war by driving a wedge between the radical nut jobs and broader Islamic world.
Western torture places the wedge between the West and the broader Islamic world.


Meh. I think you give our enemies too much credit. As long as we have a presence in the ME and continue to support Israel, they'll have all the justification they need.

jAZ
05-04-2011, 09:45 AM
No, like I said, I was specifically referring to black sites. If you wish to engage me directly on another topic, I'll be happy to do so.

You are aware that Obama said this about the CIA prisons?

“our ideals give us the strength and moral high ground” to combat terrorism

I wonder if he still thinks that.

You are the one claiming after the fact that you were trying to "engage me directly on another topic". If you had stayed on point or overtly concede the end of the prior discussion and overtly admit to wanting to pivot away to another point entirely... that would be how honest people discuss things.

You throw a few quotes cluttered quotes out, wait to see which way people go with it. Then look to see where the rhetorical weaknesses exist and see if you can go after them.

That's how you have a discussion focused on gaming the discussion itself rather than the divergent ideas people might have.

jAZ
05-04-2011, 09:48 AM
Meh. I think you give our enemies too much credit. As long as we have a presence in the ME and continue to support Israel, they'll have all the justification they need.

"Our enemies" isn't the broader Islamic world. You conflate the two just as bin Laden wants.

jAZ
05-04-2011, 09:50 AM
This number is true but misleading. The 183 is the total number of times water was poured on him; it was not the number of actual sessions; each session had multiple pourings.

I wondered about that. Thanks, good to understand.

jAZ
05-04-2011, 09:59 AM
As for allowing allied countries to do ugly interrogation and transfer the information to us... it's a mixed bag. It certainly seems to be a more legal way to approach things.

That said, those techniques still have the same basic flaws, no matter who's doing it. They lead to a lot of false information. When there is no ticking time bomb, there's no even theoretical justification for it.

And I've always maintained that you keep things like water-boarding illegal for a lot of reasons. But in the rare, back against the wall, life or death situation, you break that law and ask for forgiveness.

That forces you to only do those things in the truly urgent circumstances. Which is when it might be justified.

jAZ
05-04-2011, 10:00 AM
Proof that KSM was cooperating pre-WBing? Otherwise your statement means next to nothing.

That's not remotely true.

patteeu
05-04-2011, 10:06 AM
This is why DC is pointless. You are among the smarter, most contemplative posters in here.

ICH posted a false rumor and I responded by posting a direct link to the article showing it's false. You reply and in doing so got caught dead to rights selectively cropping out a misleading quote from the article I linked. And when confronted with the money quote that you left out, you can't even bring yourself to acknowledge your oversight or deliberate manipulation.

It would be completely typical in any normal off-line conversation to just own up to the fact that you made a mistake and I in fact did correctly post an article directly rejecting ICH's false claim. Instead you throw out a ROFL and try to change the discussion from "the information used to nail Bin Laden came from the evil interrogation techniques that Bush employed".

When the smart people in DC don't have the integrity to own up to the most obvious mistake, there is absolutely no point in spending time trying to thoughtfully debate more nuanced points of opinion.

Except that he didn't make a mistake and your article didn't show that what ICH said was false.

ICH said that enhanced interrogation was a factor. Your article says that the info didn't come directly from waterboarding.

1. Enhanced interrogation is a broader concept than just waterboarding. Your article doesn't say anything to discourage the notion that enhanced interrogation techniques contributed to bin Laden's demise. In fact, in the quote highlighted by Donger, it suggests just the opposite.

2. Once a detainee has been waterboarded, you can't un-waterboard him. His willingness to cooperate after his waterboarding experience can never be completely disassociated from that experience.

Now, in a normal off-line conversation, it would be typical that you'd just own up to your error. We'll see how you handle it on-line.

jAZ
05-04-2011, 10:09 AM
Well, yeah. How about right after the rag is removed? How long after the rag is removed would be considered by you to be indicative of "See! Waterboarding works!"?

And, how do you know that he wasn't threatened with more waterboarding? You will acknowledge that it is supposed to be rather unpleasant, right? You will acknowledge that he surely remembered the experience, right?
He was water-boarded 183 times during the middle of 2003. Then they stopped cold. And months later using standard interrogation, he gave the information.

That's what we know.

You don't just get to fabricate imaginary scenarios and pretend they are facts that prove your desired opinion on a subject.

That's massively dishonest.

patteeu
05-04-2011, 10:16 AM
He can't "squeal() during the actual procedure". He has a rag in his mouth.

But trying to claim success for water-boarding when the information comes out months later after a complete change in interrogation strategy... that's as ridiculous as someone on the other side trying to claim credit for traditional interrogation when a prisoner confesses some fact shortly after water-boarding because he underwent traditional interrogation months earlier.

It's just mind-blowing the depth of dishonesty that you and others will go to to defend even the most overtly false beliefs.

Speaking of dishonest or stupid...

patteeu
05-04-2011, 10:17 AM
Proof that KSM was cooperating pre-WBing? Otherwise your statement means next to nothing.

^ Radar Chief with the bottom line.

patteeu
05-04-2011, 10:19 AM
I don't believe they gave him the opportunity. (not that it would have mattered any)

He was captured March 1, 2003 and was waterboard 183 that year alone which means he was basically waterboarded everyday because they stopped in the fall of 2003.

That 183 means 183 pours, not 183 sessions. Each session includes multiple pours.

Edit: Nearly word-for-word repost!

patteeu
05-04-2011, 10:25 AM
I know what you were trying to do. You refused to engage directly the point being discussed, and instead posted a pair of quotes that you wanted to use to try to pivot around and obfuscate the discussion without conceding anything. It's a 2nd rate, dishonest debate game and a big part of why this forum is such garbage.

You responded to a specific discussion, largely ignored the fact that I was right, ICH was wrong, I had the evidence, he had nothing... and instead of acknowledging the overtly obvious facts of the matter, you try to pivot to a different point not being debated. All the while, not saying that that is what you are doing (ie, "you might be right, but what about").

All the while, including in your quotes a reference to the original point being debated ("a program that involved the harshest interrogation methods in U.S. history") and then immediately posting follow-up quote again referencing the initial discussion ("they used these enhanced interrogation techniques against some of these detainees").

Instead of having a willingness to engage the facts on an honest level, you try to give yourself the rhetorical flexibility to run away from the point being discussed if you feel like there might be some rhetorical weakness elsewhere.

It's deeply dishonest tactics in lieu of a quality discussion about different beliefs.

You've always been kind of low class with your penchant for calling people who disagree with you dishonest. I see you haven't changed.

Donger
05-04-2011, 10:25 AM
You are the one claiming after the fact that you were trying to "engage me directly on another topic". If you had stayed on point or overtly concede the end of the prior discussion and overtly admit to wanting to pivot away to another point entirely... that would be how honest people discuss things.

You throw a few quotes cluttered quotes out, wait to see which way people go with it. Then look to see where the rhetorical weaknesses exist and see if you can go after them.

That's how you have a discussion focused on gaming the discussion itself rather than the divergent ideas people might have.

I'm sorry that you take it that way. That wasn't what I intended.

So, do you oppose the black sites or not?

Donger
05-04-2011, 10:27 AM
"Our enemies" isn't the broader Islamic world. You conflate the two just as bin Laden wants.

No, I really don't. Our enemies are radical Islamists. Thanks for trying to tell me what I believe though. That's rather dishonest, don't you think?

jAZ
05-04-2011, 10:45 AM
ICH said that enhanced interrogation was a factor. Your article says that the info didn't come directly from waterboarding.

That's a lie, and you know it is a lie because you refused to quote him. I will.
...the information used to nail Bin Laden came from the evil interrogation techniques that Bush employed and you all (and Obama) decried...
Further, PG and I both corrected him, I provided the supporting facts:
Everything that I've read has noted the information was divulged after the techniques had been suspended.

"Mohammed did not reveal the names while being subjected to the simulated drowning technique known as waterboarding, former officials said. He identified them many months later under standard interrogation"


ICH came the closest of anyone to admitting he was wrong by admitting he was repeating what he was told by talk radio and then finding this link providing the quote from Rumsfeld disputing his point.

Not offhand. I admit I'm hearing these reports from interviews on radio shows which you would not find credible. I'll see if I can find some other sources.

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/05/02/rumsfeld-bin-laden-gitmo/

Basically they (the writers) keep calling it torture...but regardless, it seems the information was gleaned over many years. Not just since Obama took office.


2. Once a detainee has been waterboarded, you can't un-waterboard him. His willingness to cooperate after his waterboarding experience can never be completely disassociated from that experience.
That narrow point may be true, but that narrow point isn't the claim that not the point the pro-Bush, pro-waterboarding people have been making this week. And that narrow point isn't what ICH said.

And when you learn that the information came out during standard interrogation months after the water-boarding stopped, and you try to ignore that point entirely... and try to conflate your narrow point #2 with ICH's and talk radio's point that "the information used to nail Bin Laden came from[/B] the evil interrogation techniques that Bush employed and you all (and Obama) decried"... you are working actively and deliberately to be dishonest.

Very deliberately.

BucEyedPea
05-04-2011, 10:46 AM
No, I really don't. Our enemies are radical Islamists. Thanks for trying to tell me what I believe though. That's rather dishonest, don't you think?

Nope too general. Our enemy is a certain group of radical Islamacists—Al Qaeda for they are the ones that came over here and attacked here. They do not do their dirty work just over there. They are a divided category. You just want to socially engineer Islam by casting a broader net which will lead to invading more countries or remain permanently occupying them. That's exactly binLaden's game plan. You're falling for the bait which is bankrupting us and bringing us down the same way the British Empire was taken down. I don't want that.

jAZ
05-04-2011, 10:46 AM
No, I really don't. Our enemies are radical Islamists. Thanks for trying to tell me what I believe though. That's rather dishonest, don't you think?

I told you what you did, not what you believe.

jAZ
05-04-2011, 10:50 AM
You've always been kind of low class with your penchant for calling people who disagree with you dishonest. I see you haven't changed.

I say that about people who disagree with me. There are hundreds of examples in the archives that demonstrate that point.

CoMoChief
05-04-2011, 10:50 AM
Seriously, I would like to see some photos on Bin Laden that aren't fake. Am I alone in this? Does none of this seem odd to you guys?No its not just you....it is odd. its all fake...cmon the war room pic with all of obamas admin and defense officials looking like theyre sitting there watching the mission go down??? thats 100% fake... obl has been dead for sometime now. the fact they immediately destroyed any bodily evidence saying they dumped him over in the ocean should raise a red flag imo. most likely....all of those ppl arent sitting there watching the mission all on laptops etc. lol shit just makes me laugh. u dont think the timing is weird at all?? considering its kicking off obamas reelection campaign..what better way to kickstart that off by telling the entire world we killed obl??? and...if obl really did cause the attacks on 911.and we really did kill obl...gwb would have accepted obamas invite and would come down to ground zero to help celebrate.

Donger
05-04-2011, 10:50 AM
I told you what you did, not what you believe.

I didn't and don't conflate radical Islamists with the general Muslim population, which is what you claimed I did and do.

You conflate the two just as bin Laden wants.

See?

jAZ
05-04-2011, 10:57 AM
I'm sorry that you take it that way. That wasn't what I intended.

So, do you oppose the black sites or not?

If you hadn't beening using this same and similar methods for years and years in here, you might not have burned through the benefit of the doubt with me. Either you and a collection of other smart, thoughtful, analytical posters around here have some very similar, very long standing, very conveniently applied,and very unfortunate accidental rhetorical habits... or you are just playing debate games without an underlying intellectually honest grounding to discuss honest differences of opinions.

Either way, a change in approach is needed.

patteeu
05-04-2011, 11:17 AM
That's a lie, and you know it is a lie because you refused to quote him. I will.

Um, it's been widely reported that the information used to nail Bin Laden came from the evil interrogation techniques that Bush employed and you all (and Obama) decried...why hasn't Odumba pulled out of Afghanistan? Why hasn't he closed Gitmo? Basically what has he changed from the Bush years? Nada. That's why he got Bin Laden. If he had been running things his way, we would not be having this conversation.

Thanks for quoting him. Where does he say "waterboarding"? In fact, he doesn't. He says "evil interrogation techniques that Bush employed and you all (and Obama) decried". Note the plural. It's plural, because Bush was criticized for a range of enhanced interrogation techniques that included but were not limited to waterboarding. I think you owe me (and ICH and Donger) an apology. I won't hold my breath.

patteeu
05-04-2011, 11:21 AM
Further, PG and I both corrected him, I provided the supporting facts:

Your "correction" was the kind of change of subject you're accusing Donger of. ICH said "interrogation techniques" and you responded with "waterboarding".

jAZ
05-04-2011, 11:31 AM
I didn't and don't conflate radical Islamists with the general Muslim population, which is what you claimed I did and do.

You conflate the two just as bin Laden wants.

See?
Yet another example of you being unwilling to just admit that I didn't "dishonest(ly)" "tell (you) what (you) believe" at all. I told you what you did and that's not dishonest at all. I don't know what you believe, but I can see and describe what you did publicly.

Your "our enemies" post was directly in response to my to my "wedge" and "broader Islamic world" post. That link conflates the two in the absence of any clarification. You later made the direct claim that you believe "our enemies" aren't the broader Islamic world, but the radical Islamists. I agree, but when you failed to do that initially, you conflated the two.

What was in your heart, I have no evidence either way.

But bin Laden very much wants us to broaden the focus from a war against Radical Islamist terrorists into a far reaching war between the west and Christianity and the entire Islamic world (who he wants to have line up behind him).

We don't want that and won't win if we allow it to be framed that way.

jAZ
05-04-2011, 11:49 AM
Thanks for quoting him. Where does he say "waterboarding"? In fact, he doesn't. He says "evil interrogation techniques that Bush employed and you all (and Obama) decried". Note the plural. It's plural, because Bush was criticized for a range of enhanced interrogation techniques that included but were not limited to waterboarding. I think you owe me (and ICH and Donger) an apology. I won't hold my breath.
Again, just not remotely true. The article I linked in response to him, and then quoted more directly and then repeatedly referenced narrowly the key takeaway... made the point that "He identified them many months later under standard interrogation".

Yes, you should consider doing so as well.

"Mohammed did not reveal the names while being subjected to the simulated drowning technique known as waterboarding, former officials said. He identified them many months later under standard interrogation"

It was your responding to BEP that that narrowed the focus away from my point and onto the topic of waterboarding.
Rumsfeld said that on Hannity tonight too. He also said only 3 AQ ever gave up anything up under the same technique. Most of the time it doesn't work. No one was wb'd at Gitmo he also said.

1. Waterboarding doesn't stop having an effect on you when they stop pouring the water.

2. There are several harsh techniques besides waterboarding.

3. There were only 3 detainees subjected to waterboarding so 3 for 3 sounds like a pretty good batting average.

4. We've known no one was waterboarded at Gitmo for a long time.
I even deliberately corrected you when you did it.
"He identified them many months later under standard interrogation". You must hate that fact too.

vailpass
05-04-2011, 11:53 AM
Howdy Jaz, hows things in northern Mexico? I recently participated in a Phoenix version of Ben's Bells. Saw the picture of the hundreds of them that were hung at the shopping center for Gabby. Pretty cool.

jAZ
05-04-2011, 11:53 AM
Your "correction" was the kind of change of subject you're accusing Donger of. ICH said "interrogation techniques" and you responded with "waterboarding".

That's definitely a lie. I responded with "standard interrogation", you tried to narrow that to "waterboarding", I corrected you on this. And you are ignoring my correction.

That's a lie. It's dishonest. It's deliberate. You should stop.

Huffmeister
05-04-2011, 12:04 PM
I say that about people who disagree with me. There are hundreds of examples in the archives that demonstrate that point.

Are you trying to be sarcastic here? Because if you do a search for posts by you with the word "dishonest" in them, the total is 185.

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/search.php?searchid=516254

patteeu
05-04-2011, 12:36 PM
Again, just not remotely true. The article I linked in response to him, and then quoted more directly and then repeatedly referenced narrowly the key takeaway... made the point that "He identified them many months later under standard interrogation".

No, it's entirely true. You responded with a guy who said that the information didn't come from waterboarding. Here's your full quote (as opposed to your selectively edited portion of the quote):

Yes, you should consider doing so as well.

"Mohammed did not reveal the names while being subjected to the simulated drowning technique known as waterboarding, former officials said. He identified them many months later under standard interrogation"


While it's true that this unnamed source (or group of sources) claims that the information comes from "standard interrogation", the fact that they make that statement in juxaposition with the comment about waterboarding makes it unclear whether "standard" means non-enhanced or non-waterboard.

You use this article on the assumption that "standard" means "non-enhanced" (which is a fair interpretation, imo) to make the case that enhanced interrogation wasn't a factor (ICH's original claim). But you ignore the relevant part of the same article in the immediately preceding paragraphs where a named source draws the opposite conclusion. He clearly believes that this intel success vindicates the harsh techniques used at the black sites. You can't have missed this since Donger pointed it out to you.

The revelation that intelligence gleaned from the CIA's so-called black sites helped kill bin Laden was seen as vindication for many intelligence officials who have been repeatedly investigated and criticized for their involvement in a program that involved the harshest interrogation methods in U.S. history.

"We got beat up for it, but those efforts led to this great day," said Marty Martin, a retired CIA officer who for years led the hunt for bin Laden.


It was your responding to BEP that that narrowed the focus away from my point and onto the topic of waterboarding.



I even deliberately corrected you when you did it.

:facepalm:

BEP was responding to YOU when you brought up waterboarding.

She used the phrase "same technique" referring to the technique of waterboarding that YOU brought into the issue.

I replied to her post to clarify some apparent confusion about waterboarding. I didn't narrow anything.