Thread: Osama Bin Laden is Dead

Timothy Leary was once coined the most dangerous man in america. Never know how they measure that..

From: Brown admits he was fooled by fake pictures of bin Laden body

US Senator Scott Brown is retracting statements he made earlier today, when he told several news outlets that he had seen photos of Osama bin Laden’s dead body as part of an official briefing.

Brown made that assertion in an interview with NECN today to bolster his argument that the photos should not be released to the public.

“Let me assure you that he is dead, that bin Laden is dead,” Brown said. “I have seen the photos and, in fact, we’ve received the briefing and we’ll continue to get the briefings.”

Brown echoed the sentiment in a separate interview with Fox-25 TV.

“Listen, I've seen the picture," Brown said. “He’s definitely dead. And if there’s any conspiracy theories out there, you should put them to rest.”

He added that the photos were bloody and could enflame jihadists. “Anytime you have somebody who’s shot, certainly, it is gruesome,” he said.

Shortly after the interviews, Brown’s office sought to correct the senator’s statements.

NECN posted a statement on its website, saying, “Senator Brown's office tells NECN this afternoon that the bin Laden photos the senator mentions seeing about 2 minutes into the clip here were not authentic."

Fox 25 posted an update on its website, saying Brown had told the station that, “the photo that I saw and that a lot of other people saw is not authentic.”

Brown's office is declining to explain who showed him the fake photos, why he would believe photos that didn't come directly from the administration, and why he had suggested he had seen them as part of an official briefing. Instead, Brown's office responded by releasing a one-sentence statement.

"The photo that I saw and that a lot of other people saw is not authentic," the senator said in the statement.

Originally Posted by tommo

Ohhhhhh GOD! Yep, Pakistan is next.... You dumb fucks.

Your maturity shows yet again, tommo.

Originally Posted by dajo

Timothy Leary was once coined the most dangerous man in america. Never know how they measure that..

How many people did he kill?

What kind of question is that?

Also, how can people be fooled by that picture? Seriously. Especially people who are supposed to be smart.
It's the most ridiculous attempt at photoshop I've ever seen. I doubt it was even supposed to be a real attempt.

Well to be labeled "most dangerous man" you'd probably at least have to kill a few people right? People who kill people are usually dangerous, and Bin Laden set the bar pretty high...

Or destructive to society in some way. Destructive to the status quo, changing minds. Advocating an unknown and mysterious powerful drug that seems to drive people crazy or liberate them from accepted norms depending on how you look at it, causing people to demand peace and equal rights, etc. can be very dangerous to the powers that be. A possibly crazy man on drugs who is influential to a whole generation of young people would be scarier than someone everybody hates. Having an enemy unites people together for a cause, but if a crazy man starts getting kids to take drugs so that the younger generation becomes the enemy of society is very dangerous. Or at least it was feared by the paranoid powers that be at the time.

Originally Posted by Spartiate

Well to be labeled "most dangerous man" you'd probably at least have to kill a few people right? People who kill people are usually dangerous, and Bin Laden set the bar pretty high...

Timothy Leary didn't kill anyone.
American government has killed more people than any other country.

EDIT: As Dannon said, dangerous to them is someone with differing beliefs. Because it makes their power uncertain.

Leary didn't kill anyone. That's the point.

I nominate Henry Kissinger for most dangerous man. I'd say he's ahead of Bin Laden.

(There is a vote, right?)

Originally Posted by tommo

Timothy Leary didn't kill anyone.
American government has killed more people than any other country.

Any sources for this?

Originally Posted by Dannon Oneironaut

From: Brown admits he was fooled by fake pictures of bin Laden body

Thanks for making the point that most conspiracy theorists wouldn't be convinced by the pictures anyway.

I think Obama made a good and noble call here.

I wouldn't be surprised if the pictures get leaked over the course of time. They could release the DNA test, but people would claim that's faked as well.

Wikileaks to the rescue!

Originally Posted by Xei

I think Obama made a good and noble call here.

lol noble

Originally Posted by louie54

Yeah this thread is getting a little crazy. Shooting Bin Laden was a decision already made regardless of whether or not he was armed. Considering he's responsible for about 3,000 lives lost on 9/11 by having his buddies fly airplanes into some of the worlds tallest buildings, I could honestly give a rats ass about shooting this man unarmed (IMO). They also had to consider the possibility of him getting away.

You would want a trial if you were accused of something similar. A trial could have easily decided his death sentence, not a soldier executing him with a pistol. So, I disagree, except that I'd probably shoot him too as long as I was sure he was guilty. A lot tidier.

But I'm not convinced of anything anyone says. People want good for themselves, with the good of everyone else coming in a far trailing second. Politicians and martyrs definitely not excluded.

Alphacat is a genius, as well as the best Obama impersonator ever:

I heard this guy on Joe Rogan's podcast and he's way better. Might be Freddy Lockhart, but not 100% sure.
That video is pretty funny though lol

Originally Posted by Xei

Any sources for this?

Nup, I just made a huge guess. I might be wrong, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was true.

Originally Posted by tommo

Nup, I just made a huge guess. I might be wrong, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was true.

You're the reason I want to punch people in the face when they tell me 'facts.' But just you.

So why would Pakistan be criticizing the other nations for not having found Bin Laden first after this whole ordeal if, at the same time, they claim he was dead 6 years ago?

And could you imagine what it would have been like to give the guy a trial? A live, televised trial, even IN the United States? How many nay-sayers would there have been in this alternate scenario? His body, right there for everyone to see, alive, no risk of uprising for showing him dead, and we would not have simultaneously thrown the idea of "inalienable rights" down the porcelain pee-hole.

Originally Posted by Artelis

You're the reason I want to punch people in the face when they tell me 'facts.' But just you.

haha. I didn't say it was a fact. Maybe you shouldn't take everyone at their word.

Originally Posted by tommo

haha. I didn't say it was a fact. Maybe you shouldn't take everyone at their word.

then you're deliberately lying. please don't enter discussions intent on LYING to other people.

Originally Posted by Spartiate

Well to be labeled "most dangerous man" you'd probably at least have to kill a few people right? People who kill people are usually dangerous, and Bin Laden set the bar pretty high...

Thomas Midgley, Jr. invented CFCs and leaded gasoline.
He has been labeled as the most destructive life-form that ever lived.

Not intentionally. :/

There isn't a reason to release the photos. The US Government knows it would end up with egg on its face if Bin Laden had even the slightest chance of popping up again because he wasn't actually dead. Either he's dead or going to be dead, whether or not the story they gave us was true; there isn't a need for confirmation.

Yeah, people seem to forget the main piece of evidence... namely the fact that he seems to have spontaneously ceased to exist.

Originally Posted by Spartiate

Yes of course, Obama was physically there to pull the headshot on Bin Laden.

I'm not sure what you are talking about. I didn't say Obama killed him personally if that's what you mean.

Originally Posted by Spartiate

And obviously Obama only shot him to gain some votes in the coming election, otherwise he wouldn't have pursued Bin Laden at all. Definitely not a top priority as commander-in-chief of the American armed forces.

To assume that the US president, or any politician for that matter, has only, or even just primarily, in mind the duties of his office and not any upcoming elections and his political career would be more than just a little naive. And by the way, it's not about the fact that Obama continued the search for Bin Laden, but about the way it ended.

Originally Posted by Spartiate

It's not like a navy seal team made the on the spot decision to take lethal action in the middle of a firefight (instead of possibly risking friendly casualties or even losing Bin Laden). I'm sure that Bin Laden, who seemed to be well-armed, would've agreed to have been quietly captured alive by American forces had Obama not shot him in the head.

The official position of the government (now) seems to be that it was a capture-or-kill operation. However, there are several things that cast doubts on this version of the story: the claim of one national security official that it was a "kill operation", the president's wording ("… killed after a firefight …", "… captured and killed …"), the fact that Bin Laden was unarmed and other details that suggest that he was not killed during the firefight. Having said that, it's probably unlikely that we're ever going to know for sure, so it's pointless to argue about it.

If the plan was all along to kill and not just capture him, I'm pretty certain that this would be a violation of international human rights law. But even assuming that the US doesn't give a damn about international laws (which, I'm sure, is at least partly true) or if one maintains that the US is not bound to such laws, it still does seem a little bit like hypocrisy and a betrayal of self-imposed principles, as such a kill operation is, I believe, a violation of United States Presidential Executive Order 11905 and 12036, which ban US involvement in assassinations (the principal aim back then, I think, was to prevent the activities of certain three-letter-agencies from getting out of hand):
"No employee of the United States Government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, political assassination." (EO 11905)
"No person employed by or acting on behalf of the United States Government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, assassination." (EO 12036)

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/we...-2011/face-off