Links for conflicting reports? I don't believe it until I see proof.
They're in this thread, I'd have to go back and find them, or you can if you're interested.
There are conflicts on the exact details because the news organizations like to say they're first (and then we like to come here and be first here for some bizarre reason), when in fact we'd just like them to be right. But, there is no conflict on the fact that he is dead.
Just because we don't know the exact caliber of the bullet that went through his skull doesn't mean he's not dead.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
There are conflicting reports between this all happening a week ago (enough time to conduct accurate DNA testing) and Obama's orders came on April 30. If the latter is true, there is simply not enough time for accurate DNA tests.
Let me ask you a question, and everyone else who are not at all skeptical.
Why do you believe everything you read in the mainstream news? THERE IS NO PROOF YET. The body was thrown into the sea. Therefore questioning whether it really did happen and he's dead is completely natural.
Let's follow this line of thinking (if that's what we want to call it). So, let's say he's not dead. What does Obama (and by extension the US) gain from that? A day of front page news?
What's in it for Osama to stay hidden? Are we just gambling that he'll stay "gone" like he has for the recent past? Is this all an incredible ruse to get the rabbit to pop his head out of the hole, so we can THEN shoot it?
I don't get what your perceived end game here is. Conspiracy theories are fun, but most of them follow no logical conclusion (I know - there is not logic - that's the beauty of them!).
How many people would have to be in on this (including Osama and his immediate "handlers") to make something like this stick?
I'm always baffled by what the conspiracy theorists think is actually a plausible - scratch that - possible reason for these great masterminded plans and how they think the true facts are kept secret by so many people including a bunch that actually have reason NOT to.
My perceived end game? QUESTION EVERYTHING. Believe stories when proof is supplied. This is NOT conspiracy behavior, it's CRITICAL THINKING.
And I'm always baffled by people who believe everything they hear.
You can say I'm thick, but listening at the news, I really don't understand how one can say 'we have closure now' or 'the world is a safer place' following Bin Laden's death. It's absurd to think that....
Links for conflicting reports? I don't believe it until I see proof.
http://www.thedailyaztec.com/2011/05/os ... n-is-dead/
I posted another one earlier similar to this. I'm just saying that it is possible that a week ago is the time, and it has just been released. I just think it is interesting.
But, there is no conflict on the fact that he is dead.
Really? Then prove it.
Ok. I could just answer the more logical - prove there is conflict on that fact because it's impossible for me to prove there is no conflict (you can't prove something that hasn't happened).
But, instead - first - I certainly don't believe everything I read and hear. But, my last question to you was CRITICAL thinking. Yours is not. I posed questions that you ignored. Please answer those, and then the rest of us will provide you with proof.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
But, there is no conflict on the fact that he is dead.
Really? Then prove it.
I'm not talking about news stories either. I mean actual proof that he was killed in the last 30 hours.
Just curious to what your definition of proof would be. What would it take for you to believe?
My whole life
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
But, there is no conflict on the fact that he is dead.
Really? Then prove it.
I'm not talking about news stories either. I mean actual proof that he was killed in the last 30 hours.
Just curious to what your definition of proof would be. What would it take for you to believe?
We've been through this. Accurate DNA reports (they can't be obtained within hours), but photos and videos can be skewed.
I'm just wondering why it's OK to go ahead and release this news to the world when the body has been disposed of, and we're left to believe someone's word for it.
Links for conflicting reports? I don't believe it until I see proof.
http://www.thedailyaztec.com/2011/05/os ... n-is-dead/
I posted another one earlier similar to this. I'm just saying that it is possible that a week ago is the time, and it has just been released. I just think it is interesting.
Bad journalism of clearly not listening to what the President said. They have no source or anything to backup the claim.
You can say I'm thick, but listening at the news, I really don't understand how one can say 'we have closure now' or 'the world is a safer place' following Bin Laden's death. It's absurd to think that....
I totally agree.
And as Lou Reed once said: "don't believe half of what you see and none of what you hear".
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.” Variously credited to Mark Twain or Edward Abbey.
Links for conflicting reports? I don't believe it until I see proof.
http://www.thedailyaztec.com/2011/05/os ... n-is-dead/
I posted another one earlier similar to this. I'm just saying that it is possible that a week ago is the time, and it has just been released. I just think it is interesting.
Bad journalism of clearly not listening to what the President said. They have no source or anything to backup the claim.
I'm not arguing that they don't have anything to back up the claims. But any source can say anything, including press conferences. I mean, they could all be telling stories. Wherever this source came from, it's not the only one, and it's rather coincidental that more than one source had this initial story.
You can say I'm thick, but listening at the news, I really don't understand how one can say 'we have closure now' or 'the world is a safer place' following Bin Laden's death. It's absurd to think that....
I totally agree.
And as Lou Reed once said: "don't believe half of what you see and none of what you hear".
My perceived end game? QUESTION EVERYTHING. Believe stories when proof is supplied. This is NOT conspiracy behavior, it's CRITICAL THINKING.
And I'm always baffled by people who believe everything they hear.
I agree. And not enough details have been provided. But this was a covert operation. We may never get the blow-by-blow.
But I do not believe the president lied on national television and I do believe our government can conduct a DNA test a lot faster than you think when the need calls for it.
I don't want anyone to think that I hope Bin Laden is still alive and well, but that we all seem to be at the mercy of our govt when they tell us news that is widely approved of, even when the story has not been proven yet.
My perceived end game? QUESTION EVERYTHING. Believe stories when proof is supplied. This is NOT conspiracy behavior, it's CRITICAL THINKING.
And I'm always baffled by people who believe everything they hear.
I agree. And not enough details have been provided. But this was a covert operation. We may never get the blow-by-blow.
But I do not believe the president lied on national television and I do believe our government can conduct a DNA test a lot faster than you think when the need calls for it.
i agree...i very skeptical of our govt but the whole way this thing has gone down seems like it's real...but... :think:
My perceived end game? QUESTION EVERYTHING. Believe stories when proof is supplied. This is NOT conspiracy behavior, it's CRITICAL THINKING.
And I'm always baffled by people who believe everything they hear.
I agree. And not enough details have been provided. But this was a covert operation. We may never get the blow-by-blow.
But I do not believe the president lied on national television and I do believe our government can conduct a DNA test a lot faster than you think when the need calls for it.
Apparently the govt has top secret technology for quick results, that no one else has access to. Not surprising, but I hope there's independent analysis on it as well as the govt's biased team analyzing it.
now as for the proof, there have been reports from the government that a DNA match was found, so what real proof do you really need. I personally believe that the reports are correct cause if not don't you think we would be hearing from experts saying how there is no way that DNA can be found as a match that early?
There are conflicting reports between this all happening a week ago (enough time to conduct accurate DNA testing) and Obama's orders came on April 30. If the latter is true, there is simply not enough time for accurate DNA tests.
Let me ask you a question, and everyone else who are not at all skeptical.
Why do you believe everything you read in the mainstream news? THERE IS NO PROOF YET. The body was thrown into the sea. Therefore questioning whether it really did happen and he's dead is completely natural.
First off, just because i believe this story doesn't mean i believe everything main stream news. just like how i might not believe info from non-mainstrem news paper but believe other stories they report on.
now concerning the reports, i will give you that there might be conflicting reports about when this all happen but at the present moment the government is saying that it all happen yesterday and that DNA test were already done. don't you for a second believe that if DNA test was completed and results were already in that a expert would come up and say "a DNA test can't be done that fast?" of course there would.
Secondly, if Osama is alive don't you think that maybe he might release a videotape saying Hey remember me. i hear i am dead but yet I'm still talking to you all.
you also have the story of the guy who was tweeting about what was happening as it was happen as Norm showed.
I don't want anyone to think that I hope Bin Laden is still alive and well, but that we all seem to be at the mercy of our govt when they tell us news that is widely approved of, even when the story has not been proven yet.
What proof is good enough? Will it be enough when the lead medical examiner says - yep - DNA proves it? OR will you need to look at the DNA sample yourself. At some point, you're going to have to believe something somebody says about something.
I don't get why you'd question this (or, I should more properly say - question this beyond the fleeting thought that quickly passes in all of us regarding this b/c it would be so illogical for the President to lie about something like this AND for the necessary people to be kept quiet after the fact).
We get it. You don't trust the gov't. Bravo for you. But with this you just sound like a loon (no offence intended).
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
now as for the proof, there have been reports from the government that a DNA match was found, so what real proof do you really need. I personally believe that the reports are correct cause if not don't you think we would be hearing from experts saying how there is no way that DNA can be found as a match that early?
There are conflicting reports between this all happening a week ago (enough time to conduct accurate DNA testing) and Obama's orders came on April 30. If the latter is true, there is simply not enough time for accurate DNA tests.
Let me ask you a question, and everyone else who are not at all skeptical.
Why do you believe everything you read in the mainstream news? THERE IS NO PROOF YET. The body was thrown into the sea. Therefore questioning whether it really did happen and he's dead is completely natural.
First off, just because i believe this story doesn't mean i believe everything main stream news. just like how i might not believe info from non-mainstrem news paper but believe other stories they report on.
now concerning the reports, i will give you that there might be conflicting reports about when this all happen but at the present moment the government is saying that it all happen yesterday and that DNA test were already done. don't you for a second believe that if DNA test was completed and results were already in that a expert would come up and say "a DNA test can't be done that fast?" of course there would.
Secondly, if Osama is alive don't you think that maybe he might release a videotape saying Hey remember me. i hear i am dead but yet I'm still talking to you all.
you also have the story of the guy who was tweeting about what was happening as it was happen as Norm showed.
I have to disagree with what you keep saying "QUESTION EVERYTHING"
This isn't X-Files. Democracy is what it is. Political parties have leaders. Countries have leaders.
I'm not suggesting everyone blindly follow what they say.. but CUT THEM SOME SLACK!!
If you cannot trust Obama when he says bin Laden is dead.... then I pity you for living in a state of
constant concern.
Yes folks, it's ok to TRUST your government.
Toronto 2000
Buffalo, Phoenix, Toronto 2003
Boston I&II 2004
Kitchener, Hamilton, London, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto 2005
Toronto I&II, Las Vegas 2006
Chicago Lollapalooza 2007
Toronto, Seattle I&II, Vancouver, Philly I,II,III,IV 2009
Cleveland, Buffalo 2010
Toronto I&II 2011
Buffalo 2013 Toronto I&II 2016 10C: 220xxx
Thanks for this. hopefully this clears up some info out there.
yes, it does, and is very interesting. At least that very same article mentions the other sources who talk about a week ago, as I have been feeling as though I am crazy for even bringing that up here because there is nothing to 'back that up'. Please also note that I am not the only one who thinks that could be very possible. :roll:
Comments
There are conflicts on the exact details because the news organizations like to say they're first (and then we like to come here and be first here for some bizarre reason), when in fact we'd just like them to be right. But, there is no conflict on the fact that he is dead.
Just because we don't know the exact caliber of the bullet that went through his skull doesn't mean he's not dead.
My perceived end game? QUESTION EVERYTHING. Believe stories when proof is supplied. This is NOT conspiracy behavior, it's CRITICAL THINKING.
And I'm always baffled by people who believe everything they hear.
Hey man, if you can't provide proof...I don't believe it. It's not up to me to prove it.
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
I posted another one earlier similar to this. I'm just saying that it is possible that a week ago is the time, and it has just been released. I just think it is interesting.
I'm not talking about news stories either. I mean actual proof that he was killed in the last 30 hours.
Ok. I could just answer the more logical - prove there is conflict on that fact because it's impossible for me to prove there is no conflict (you can't prove something that hasn't happened).
But, instead - first - I certainly don't believe everything I read and hear. But, my last question to you was CRITICAL thinking. Yours is not. I posed questions that you ignored. Please answer those, and then the rest of us will provide you with proof.
Just curious to what your definition of proof would be. What would it take for you to believe?
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
I'm just wondering why it's OK to go ahead and release this news to the world when the body has been disposed of, and we're left to believe someone's word for it.
Bad journalism of clearly not listening to what the President said. They have no source or anything to backup the claim.
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
I totally agree.
And as Lou Reed once said: "don't believe half of what you see and none of what you hear".
:thumbup: I may have to steal his quote.
But I do not believe the president lied on national television and I do believe our government can conduct a DNA test a lot faster than you think when the need calls for it.
Oh well, nevermind.
i agree...i very skeptical of our govt but the whole way this thing has gone down seems like it's real...but... :think:
Apparently the govt has top secret technology for quick results, that no one else has access to. Not surprising, but I hope there's independent analysis on it as well as the govt's biased team analyzing it.
First off, just because i believe this story doesn't mean i believe everything main stream news. just like how i might not believe info from non-mainstrem news paper but believe other stories they report on.
now concerning the reports, i will give you that there might be conflicting reports about when this all happen but at the present moment the government is saying that it all happen yesterday and that DNA test were already done. don't you for a second believe that if DNA test was completed and results were already in that a expert would come up and say "a DNA test can't be done that fast?" of course there would.
Secondly, if Osama is alive don't you think that maybe he might release a videotape saying Hey remember me. i hear i am dead but yet I'm still talking to you all.
you also have the story of the guy who was tweeting about what was happening as it was happen as Norm showed.
What proof is good enough? Will it be enough when the lead medical examiner says - yep - DNA proves it? OR will you need to look at the DNA sample yourself. At some point, you're going to have to believe something somebody says about something.
I don't get why you'd question this (or, I should more properly say - question this beyond the fleeting thought that quickly passes in all of us regarding this b/c it would be so illogical for the President to lie about something like this AND for the necessary people to be kept quiet after the fact).
We get it. You don't trust the gov't. Bravo for you. But with this you just sound like a loon (no offence intended).
http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/ ... 2011-05-02
OPEN YOUR EYES! HE WAS IN ON IT TOO!
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
Thanks for this. hopefully this clears up some info out there.
Is it an assassination when firefighting takes place on both sides?
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
I have to disagree with what you keep saying "QUESTION EVERYTHING"
This isn't X-Files. Democracy is what it is. Political parties have leaders. Countries have leaders.
I'm not suggesting everyone blindly follow what they say.. but CUT THEM SOME SLACK!!
If you cannot trust Obama when he says bin Laden is dead.... then I pity you for living in a state of
constant concern.
Yes folks, it's ok to TRUST your government.
Buffalo, Phoenix, Toronto 2003
Boston I&II 2004
Kitchener, Hamilton, London, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto 2005
Toronto I&II, Las Vegas 2006
Chicago Lollapalooza 2007
Toronto, Seattle I&II, Vancouver, Philly I,II,III,IV 2009
Cleveland, Buffalo 2010
Toronto I&II 2011
Buffalo 2013
Toronto I&II 2016
10C: 220xxx
They've admitted that they went in with the intention to kill him.