BREAKING NEWS: Osama Bin Laden is dead!

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

She was an enemy of the Jihadist/Taliban. They don't like women like her so they assassinated her.

I realize that they "don't like women like her..." but you would think "they" would have let her live since she was spreading so much disinformation.

That's assuming that the "they" who killed her were linked to bin Laden. In reality, she was probably killed because her name was "Bhutto" - a formerly powerful family in Paki politics whose reemergence would threaten those now in charge.

[Seascapes]

Originally Posted by Cindy
So if Bin Laden is dead, who's next? Why weren't any of his buddies there with him?

Cindy, now if I heard right, .... his oldest son was there with him. What if, he was going to take his place. Maybe after the information that was gathered our government will know more about who was next in line. I am also thankful that his oldest son (age ?) was killed also.

[coadie]

Originally Posted by Seascapes

Originally Posted by Cindy
So if Bin Laden is dead, who's next? Why weren't any of his buddies there with him?

Cindy, now if I heard right, .... his oldest son was there with him. What if, he was going to take his place. Maybe after the information that was gathered our government will know more about who was next in line. I am also thankful that his oldest son (age ?) was killed also.

You are thankfull for killing? No trial?

[ILG]

I don't have time to read this whole thread, so I am sorry if this subject has already been touched on, but this whole thing seems fishy to me. Of course, we know the government would never lie about anything, especially when Obama's poll numbers have been going down.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by ILG

I don't have time to read this whole thread, so I am sorry if this subject has already been touched on, but this whole thing seems fishy to me. Of course, we know the government would never lie about anything, especially when Obama's poll numbers have been going down.

I think that there's too much cross-verification on this one. Besides, if Obama was faking having killed Osama, all Osama would have to do is come out with a new video showing himself with that day's newspaper or something.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by coadie

You are thankfull for killing? No trial?

He confessed. No trial needed. We go straight from confession to judgment.

[ILG]

Originally Posted by pelathais

I think that there's too much cross-verification on this one. Besides, if Obama was faking having killed Osama, all Osama would have to do is come out with a new video showing himself with that day's newspaper or something.

Not if he was dead already and they saved the info for a convenient date.

[MissBrattified]

Originally Posted by ILG

I don't have time to read this whole thread, so I am sorry if this subject has already been touched on, but this whole thing seems fishy to me. Of course, we know the government would never lie about anything, especially when Obama's poll numbers have been going down.

Some things are harder to lie about, though. If they didn't really kill OBL, that would mean that President Obama's entire cabinet would have to be in on the charade, + the military forces and the CIA that helped take him out. Oh, and then you have the guys on the ship who took him out to sea to be buried. And if it wasn't OBL, it would be quite easy for him to pop up with another terrorist video to show he was still alive and kicking. Which of course he would want to do in order to embarrass the U.S.

What I do think is that the CIA and the President and whoever else have probably known of OBL's whereabouts for quite some time, but hadn't made a move because of the problem of riding roughshod over the Pakistani government. It could be that the President was willing to make a tough decision because he knew his approval was drooping, or maybe he really wanted to take out OBL, but was weighing the decision for other reasons. He never really campaigned against the war in Afghanistan and did state from the beginning of his presidency that OBL would be a prime target.

This is from 2007:

"In a strikingly bold speech about terrorism Wednesday, Democratic presidential candidate Illinois Sen. Barack Obama called not only for a withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, but a redeployment of troops into Afghanistan and even Pakistan — with or without the permission of Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf."

I understand that President Musharraf has his own challenges," Obama said, "but let me make this clear. There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al Qaeda leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will.

It does appear that this type of action was his plan all along.

Another point to ponder: Obama didn't get all the liberals in his corner with this move. Some of them are pretty dicey about this little piece of military action. So who was he trying to win over?

[ILG]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

Some things are harder to lie about, though. If they didn't really kill OBL, that would mean that President Obama's entire cabinet would have to be in on the charade, + the military forces and the CIA that helped take him out. Oh, and then you have the guys on the ship who took him out to sea to be buried. And if it wasn't OBL, it would be quite easy for him to pop up with another terrorist video to show he was still alive and kicking. Which of course he would want to do in order to embarrass the U.S.

What I do think is that the CIA and the President and whoever else have probably known of OBL's whereabouts for quite some time, but hadn't made a move because of the problem of riding roughshod over the Pakistani government. It could be that the President was willing to make a tough decision because he knew his approval was drooping, or maybe he really wanted to take out OBL, but was weighing the decision for other reasons. He never really campaigned against the war in Afghanistan and did state from the beginning of his presidency that OBL would be a prime target.

This is from 2007:

"In a strikingly bold speech about terrorism Wednesday, Democratic presidential candidate Illinois Sen. Barack Obama called not only for a withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, but a redeployment of troops into Afghanistan and even Pakistan — with or without the permission of Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf."

I understand that President Musharraf has his own challenges," Obama said, "but let me make this clear. There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al Qaeda leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will.

It does appear that this type of action was his plan all along.

Another point to ponder: Obama didn't get all the liberals in his corner with this move. Some of them are pretty dicey about this little piece of military action. So who was he trying to win over?

I disagree. My thinking is he was dead already and they kept it secret until it was convenient. Then, you have someone who looks like Osama in the convenient place and he, of course doesn't know what is about to happen. Everything is staged and the people that were there, were THERE and they will say they were there. Not as far fetched as it may seem IMO.

A few dissident liberals are not needed to be won over nearly as much as the whole.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by ILG

I disagree. My thinking is he was dead already and they kept it secret until it was convenient. Then, you have someone who looks like Osama in the convenient place and he, of course doesn't know what is about to happen. Everything is staged and the people that were there, were THERE and they will say they were there. Not as far fetched as it may seem IMO.

A few dissident liberals are not needed to be won over nearly as much as the whole.

You'd probably like this article:


How Obama Bungled the Aftermath of the OBL Mission

What I expected on Sunday evening as I waited for Obama to finally appear on television was a more detailed explanation of what transpired, beginning with a brief summary of the intelligence leading up to the operation and ending with photos of the compound and bin Laden himself. Rather than a presidential appearance with the pomp and circumstance of red carpets and the like, I expected the President to appear in the White House briefing room to make a statement and then leave the details and follow-up questions to the likes of his Press Secretary as well as military personnel who had been briefed on the details of the operation. Not surprisingly, I was disappointed.

It is now Wednesday and conspiracy theories abound due to the scarcity of information provided by the White House.

It is difficult not to wonder why the man who claims full responsibility for the success of this military incursion has not been able to share more details of the plan and how it was carried out, more information about Pakistan's involvement (or lack thereof), and put to bed the rumor mill that is growing minute by minute.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/..._aftermat.html