Forums

 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages 
Bin Laden Kill
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fortean Times Message Board Forum Index -> Conspiracy - The War on Terror
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
ted_bloody_maulOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 23 May 2003
Total posts: 4592
Location: Quester's Psykick Dancehall
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 01-09-2011 21:06    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pietro_Mercurios wrote:

Explanations without proof would simply be conjecture.

'Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.'


A simpler explanation. Not an extraordinary one. And not proof, just a theory. I'm more than happy to listen to your conjecture on this occasion. I know you're something of a shrinking violet when it comes to offering an opinion but it would be really nice to hear one.
Back to top
View user's profile 
hokum6Offline
I am one can short of a six-pack!
Joined: 21 Apr 2005
Total posts: 833
Location: Location Location
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 01-09-2011 21:58    Post subject: Reply with quote

Analis wrote:
You are.


Everything we have - news reports, photos, video, government statements - says Bin Laden was alive until killed in Pakistan. If you're going to claim otherwise then you are the one making the extraordinary claim. Maybe that's not much to go on, but it's what we have, and I would assume that if you're saying it wasn't Bin Laden you've got some factual basis to make that claim.
Back to top
View user's profile 
Jerry_BOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 15 Apr 2002
Total posts: 8072
PostPosted: 01-09-2011 22:28    Post subject: Reply with quote

So someone has to explain the efficacy of Al Q not claiming that OBL had died earlier, when the news that the US were saying that they had killed him was released in May.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
Jerry_BOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 15 Apr 2002
Total posts: 8072
PostPosted: 01-09-2011 22:31    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pietro_Mercurios wrote:
Pure conjecture.


Eh? Surely we're all using a bit of conjecture within this thread? Hence the discussion Rolling Eyes So you may be stating the bleeding obvious there Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
Pietro_Mercurios
Heuristically Challenged
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 01-09-2011 22:31    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just prove that he actually was assassinated in May. Couldn't be simpler.
Back to top
View user's profile 
Jerry_BOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 15 Apr 2002
Total posts: 8072
PostPosted: 01-09-2011 22:39    Post subject: Reply with quote

Prove that he wasn't Wink All I've chosen to do thus far is wonder why certain parties haven't exploited the situation.

After all, if we take the official account as the true account and use that as a starting basis for the argument, what do we have that supports or disproves it?
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
ted_bloody_maulOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 23 May 2003
Total posts: 4592
Location: Quester's Psykick Dancehall
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 01-09-2011 22:41    Post subject: Reply with quote

What proof would sceptics require?
Back to top
View user's profile 
Pietro_Mercurios
Heuristically Challenged
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 01-09-2011 22:52    Post subject: Reply with quote

ted_bloody_maul wrote:
What proof would sceptics require?

What actual proof is there? confused
Back to top
View user's profile 
ted_bloody_maulOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 23 May 2003
Total posts: 4592
Location: Quester's Psykick Dancehall
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 01-09-2011 23:21    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pietro_Mercurios wrote:

What actual proof is there? confused


What proof would sceptics require?
Back to top
View user's profile 
Jerry_BOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 15 Apr 2002
Total posts: 8072
PostPosted: 02-09-2011 07:39    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, this is all going round in circles...
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
JonfairwayOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 09 Mar 2005
Total posts: 1270
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 02-09-2011 09:33    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I'm not asking for proof or claiming proof, I'm asking for a simpler explanation.


why would a simpler explanantion be the truth Ted ?

your still getting gogged down with , why it makes sense for AQ to pretend he was alive and why the US wanted him alive longer than he was , and why they wanted him dead when they did, and how AQ would be happy with it that way.
Back to top
View user's profile 
JonfairwayOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 09 Mar 2005
Total posts: 1270
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 02-09-2011 09:35    Post subject: Reply with quote

looping effortlessly in the whys, and buts

try looking at some facts that can be looked at from our point of view, what data do we have access too ?

stop sumizing and look at what we can see
Back to top
View user's profile 
ted_bloody_maulOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 23 May 2003
Total posts: 4592
Location: Quester's Psykick Dancehall
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 02-09-2011 10:31    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's quite straightforward.

I'm not claiming that the US administration has given definitive proof. They have made an extraordinary claim. You can argue that the onus of proof is on them. My point is that there a great many people out there in whose interest it would be to disprove the American claims of Bin Laden's death.

If Obama claimed that unemployment had been slashed, that violent crime was non-existent in America or that the Tea Party were being funded by the KKK then of course people would ask him for proof of his claims. However, it would be bizzare to think that those who stood to lose from his assertions being accepted would not actively seek to disprove his claims regardless of what he did or didn't offer by way of explanation. In short, they would produce their own evidence to counter his claims both to defend themselves and to attack him.

I'm not claiming that a simpler explanation is the truth or proof of anything. Merely that it it the most likely version. None of us know What Really Goes On, especially if it does happen to be as subverted as many would believe. We can only make a best guess based on what seems most plausible.

Some have countered that the American version of what happened with Bin Laden's assassination is not the simplest explanation. If they believe that to be true why can they not offer a simpler explanation? Not definitive proof or even a likely explanation just a simpler one? Given that it seems to animate those making the claim it simply comes across as evasion and a desire to believe something regardless of any consideration of facts and possibilities that they're not prepared to do so. When they're unwilling to even specify what could convince them this impression is reinforced.
Back to top
View user's profile 
Jerry_BOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 15 Apr 2002
Total posts: 8072
PostPosted: 02-09-2011 13:26    Post subject: Reply with quote

I agree with Ted. Either OBL was killed by the US, or Al Q seem very slow to pronounce anything to the contrary - even if it's to say that OBL died several years ago. The fact that neither of things have happened would have to be explained by those that doubt the official version of things.

I say this as we have no actual conclusive proof that OBL is still alive or was killed in May. The only way we could possibly tell what has happened is from reactions - as I've outlined above.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
AnalisOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Total posts: 950
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 02-09-2011 16:04    Post subject: Reply with quote

hokum6 wrote:
Everything we have - news reports, photos, video, government statements - says Bin Laden was alive until killed in Pakistan.


News reports ? But they are merely repeating what official sources said. When journalists really investigated and found interesting stories, they were dropped.
The video of the old man watching TV ? This man could be OBL, but why didn't they provide a video of him completely and unambiguously visible ? And his neighbours disputed that it was him.
And about government statements, they have a general lack of credibility, as they have produced a number of conflicting versions, with no apparent reason. And the motive for the diposal of the body doesn't stand up to scrutiny, and has been dismissed by various Muslim authorities.

The rest of the evidence similarly doesn't tally.
If visual witnesses confirmed the presence of gunshots and of an helicopter, their accounts contradicted the official version (notably about the possibility that a body was retrieved). The three so-called OBL's relatives gave three completely different accounts. And we don't know what they've become ; wouldn't it be interesting for a journalist to try to interview them ?
Similarly, OBL's mansion has been described as devoid of any radio, phone or electronic connection with the world, but then there was a TV, a phone etc...

ted_bloody_maul wrote:
So what do you count as real evidence?


Body, and clear, uncontrovertible pictures. Like those from the tiny cameras worn by the Navy Seals commandos who took part in the operation.
Ah, but last news are that these cameras never existed after all. Despite CBS News national security correspondent David Martin had cited details that had been alledegly retrieved from the examination of their recordings :
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/05/12/eveningnews/main20062410.shtml?tag=cbsContent;cbsCarousel

Their existence had been admitted by the media and the public, with an implicit admission from the authorities. But now, again, a wide part of the official story has changed.

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2011/08/17-1
« The SEALs were not wearing helmet cams, contrary to a widely cited report by CBS »


ted_bloody_maul wrote:
I don't think it's definitive proof. I don't know anyone who does. I do believe, however, that's it's more likely that they would make the most of a propaganda gift which would be more potent than anything they've come up with themselves so far. If they did provide proof I'd probably be promoting your argument about a fictionalised war on terror and the events of 9/11. But they haven't and so I'm not.


Jerry_B wrote:
So someone has to explain the efficacy of Al Q not claiming that OBL had died earlier, when the news that the US were saying that they had killed him was released in May.


I had given reasons that I personnally found convincing for that. I will just briefly sum them up here.
That somebody has information that would be heavily detrimental for their ennemies, and doesn't try to use it for their benefit, is it absurd ? Your opinion relies on this presupposition, but there are many historical precedents for that - we had already covered this part. The reason is that the revelation of a shared secret is detrimental to both sides.

I can imagine that an Al Qaida leader, as an idealized version of a fanatical Muslim drawn by his nihilistic dream of martyrdom for Allah the Almighty, would try to reveal that OBL had been dead for many years. But I can also foresee the consequences for his fight. Loss of credibility among potential recruits, loss of leadership, loss of trust from fighters in their leaders... Their already decaying army would be reduced to an even smaller core of the most fanatical, which wouldn't last long.

And I don't give much importance to the arguments that jihadists are motivated only by a pure irrational ideal of martyrdom. They're human beings, and like with all human beings, prospect of victory, trust in their leaders or fashion play an important role. A decade ago, jihadists could find many more recruits. Now that they are losing everywhere, that promises from AQ leaders haven't come to fruition, their numbers have drastically dwindled. Seems that the prospect of becoming a martyr for the cause of Allah is not so appealing by itself after all.
AQ leaders, if they are still alive at all, understand that. So, unless they want to scuttle what is left of their army, they probably wouldn't reveal that OBL had been dead for years.


For those who know this movie, I have recently re-watched Farenheit 451. The scene of 'Montag's' execution, towards the end, made me uneasy. Because I have no reason to believe that we are not facing a similar situation.
Back to top
View user's profile 
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fortean Times Message Board Forum Index -> Conspiracy - The War on Terror All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 4 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group