Osama Bin Laden is Dead

[Bigred]

This news is so big it even deserves a spot on a wargaming blog.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/05/01/bin.laden.obit/index.html?hpt=T1

I'll never forget waking up to turn on my TV and seeing the 2nd tower fall live... ten years back.

[eldargal]

My brothers woke me up to tell me this, I hope its true. Long, long overdue.

[Bigred]

President Obama just spoke.

The CIA killed him, and has taken custody of the body.

[eldargal]

Good.

[Brass Scorpion]

I let my son stay up late to watch the president's speech about this even though it's a school night. History in the making and some good news for a change.

http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/05/01/6566912-osama-bin-ladin-is-dead

Osama bin Ladin is dead
By Laura Conaway
-
Sun May 1, 2011 10:51 PM EDT

The terrorist Osama bin Ladin is dead, NBC correspondent Andrea Mitchell reports. The United States has bin Ladin's body, NBC is reporting, and he is dead as the result of an American action in Pakistan Afghanistan (or Pakistan -- this point is not clear) Abbottabad, Pakistan.

"We could be turning to a new phase," Richart Engel is saying on TV. With democracy and the push for democracy taking root across the Middle East, bin Ladin had become "despicable" in the region, he says. And now the U.S. seems to have gotten the man sought by two presidents, in Pakistan, where he'd taken shelter. This so happens to be the eighth anniversary of President George W. Bush donning that flight suit and proclaiming "mission accomplished."

President Bush led the nation into war in Afghanistan to get bin Ladin and to break up the Afghan government that had given him a base for the 9-11 attacks. Mr. Bush then led the nation into war in Iraq under several discredited rationales. American troops continue to sacrifice their lives in both countries. After failing to catch bin Ladin in Afghanistan, the U.S. expanded into what amounts to a third, undeclared war in Pakistan, run by the CIA. NBC reports that bin Ladin was not killed by a drone strike, but rather a Special Ops action that had been months in the making. NBC reports that bin Ladin was shot in the head during a firefight.

A small crowd of 50 or so people has gathered outside the White House, singing the national anthem and cheering. President Obama is expected to speak momentarily.

"Nearly 3,000 citizens taken from us, leaving a gaping hole in our hearts," President Obama said, opening with a remembrance of 9-11. He says that since then, we've removed the Taliban government that supported bin Ladin and captured scores of terrorists. He says he directed CIA chief Leon Panetta to make capturing or killing bin Ladin the top priority. Last August, Mr. Obama says, he was briefed on a lead that bin Ladin was hiding in Pakistan. Last week, he believed the United States had enough information to act. Today, the U.S. struck the compound, and killed bin Ladin. "Over the years, I have repeatedly made clear that we would take action within Pakistan if we knew where he was," Mr. Obama said. He added, "On nights like this one, we can say to families who have lost loved ones to Al Qaeda's terror, justice has been done."

Among the many official statements to come tonight from elected leaders is one from former President Bush. He writes in part, "No matter how long it takes, justice will be done."

And this from New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, whose primary election was scheduled for 9-11 and interrupted by the attacks: "The killing of Osama bin Laden does not lessen the suffering that New Yorkers and Americans experienced at his hands, but it is a critically important victory for our nation -- and a tribute to the millions of men and women in our armed forces and elsewhere who have fought so hard for our nation."

Rachel just tweeted, "In DC. People streaming on foot toward the WH. Car horns honking and much shouting. People hopping out of cabs in the middle of traffic. Guy on a bike just passed me with a US flag cape. Happy scrum in front of the White House -- USA! USA! Chants. One adorable very drunk guy yelling '10 Years!!'"

[Hive Mind]

"Justice" has apparently been done.

I do find it curious that Americans seem incapable of distinguishing justice and revenge.

[Brass Scorpion]

Hmm, the first use of the word "justice" in a broad, subjective statement in this thread would appear to be in that rhetorical question, thus it appears to be either an attempt at trolling or simply an irrelevant non-sequitur.

[Hive Mind]

Or you are not in full possession of the facts and I'm commenting on a quote from Dubya.


The fight against terror goes on, but tonight America has sent an unmistakable message: No matter how long it takes, justice will be done

That one.

[Brass Scorpion]

For the sake of the forum my main interest was merely in preventing this thread from devolving into the usual horrible and irrational crap that any open Internet political discussion inevitably does irrespective of whether I agreed or disagreed with the comment. So, as is often the case to avoid aggravation on this and other forums, I'll make my last comment and then never return to look at the thread again because I'm sure the floodgate of excrement will open once more users are awake.

Cause for celebration or at least a sense of relief that this news is for so many people, the State Dept. is already warning of backlash:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_us_bin_laden_warn


US warns of anti-American violence after bin Laden
AP

MATTHEW LEE, Associated Press Matthew Lee, Associated Press – 24 mins ago

WASHINGTON – The State Department early Monday put U.S. embassies on alert and warned of the heightened possibility for anti-American violence after the killing of al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden by American forces in Pakistan.

In a worldwide travel alert released shortly after President Barack Obama late Sunday announced bin Laden's death in a U.S. military operation, the department said there was an "enhanced potential for anti-American violence given recent counterterrorism activity in Pakistan."

"Given the uncertainty and volatility of the current situation, U.S. citizens in areas where recent events could cause anti-American violence are strongly urged to limit their travel outside of their homes and hotels and avoid mass gatherings and demonstrations," it said.

The alert said U.S. embassy operations would continue "to the extent possible under the constraints of any evolving security situation." It noted that embassies and consulates may temporarily close or suspend public services, depending on conditions.

[Bigred]

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/224051_10150183881421777_589666776_7363523_6154864 _n.jpg

[eldargal]

Whether or not it was justice or revenge is a philosophical debate which is hardly relevent to the fact that a mass murderer who set in motion events which led to two major wars was just killed in a battle with US troops. You can't blame people for being pleased and for many it will be justice, for others revenge.


This is brilliant:

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/224051_10150183881421777_589666776_7363523_6154864 _n.jpg

[Necron2.0]

Of course, there will be retaliation for this from the radical Islamic jackwagons. And of course, they too will be hunted down and killed. Then there will be retaliation for that, and those will be killed too. Then retaliation for that, and those will be killed, and ... and ... and ... and.

At some point you wish these idiots would come to the realization that we can and will use every means at our disposal to kill every last single one of them, until they stop acting like pigs. Sadly, I just don't think they ever will.

[jmach]

Yea thank god he's gone, I remember watching that second plain hit on tv just before class started for me back in my sophomore year in high school, it has been a long time coming.

Side note that pic is amazing.

[Hive Mind]

A U.S. official told CNN that bin Laden was buried at sea. The official said his body was handled in the Islamic tradition, but did not elaborate.

http://us.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/05/02/bin.laden.dead/index.html?hpt=T1

[Hive Mind]

http://desmond.yfrog.com/Himg619/scaled.php?tn=0&server=619&filename=jncte.jpg&xsize=640&ysize=640

[eldargal]

That is good also, I was rather worried we might see some barbaric display of his corpse.

[Hive Mind]

Yes, it's good that, if CNN is correct, they have disposed of any kind of proof or evidence.

[eldargal]

I stopped believing in conspiracy theories when I was twelve. They wouldn't announce this with such fanfare when all it would take is one message from OBN to profoundly humiliate the US.

[Hive Mind]

No, they wouldn't lie would they? Remember all those WMDs found in Iraq?

You're far too trusting IMO.

[eldargal]

Apples and oranges. I'm not too trusting, I'm realistic. We knew Iraq did not have WMD, we know Bin Laden could be proven to be alive with a simple voice recording released to the media. Just because one US administration made a patently transparent lie doesn't mean another administration will make a similarly stupid lie. You also assume the US government doesn't have proof simply because they haven't released it yet.

[Hive Mind]

I'm not saying that they haven't killed Usama. It just seems odd to me that they've got rid of his body so soon. They'll say it's out of respect for Islamic traditions but how many other dead muslims have had the same courtesy extended to them by U.S forces?

It all seems fishy to me.

[Farseer Uthiliesh]

I'm not saying that they haven't killed Usama. It just seems odd to me that they've got rid of his body so soon. They'll say it's out of respect for Islamic traditions but how many other dead muslims have had the same courtesy extended to them by U.S forces?

It all seems fishy to me.

But that doesn't imply something odd is going on. I hope Obama can produce a death certificate! :rolleyes:

[eldargal]

I imagine the US were particularly keen to treat his body with all possible respect to show this wasn't about revenge or hatred of Islam and all the rest of it. Assuming the report about his burial at sea being accurate. It also pre-empts any demands from various nutjob groups to put his body on display.


I'm not saying that they haven't killed Usama. It just seems odd to me that they've got rid of his body so soon. They'll say it's out of respect for Islamic traditions but how many other dead muslims have had the same courtesy extended to them by U.S forces?

It all seems fishy to me.

[Grailkeeper]

8 years to the day (apparantly) of Bush's mission accomplished speech.

I wonder if it would have been possible to take him alive and to try him for his crimes? I guess we'll never know for definite. Certainly it would have been hard to keep him locked up anyway other than secretly.



That said this GIF is BOSS http://thedailywh.at/2011/05/01/animated-gif-of-the-day-2/

[Necron2.0]

Assuming first that the corpse in question actually is that of Osama Bin Laden, if I were to suspect any sort of conspiracy here, it'd be that they found Osama's body. He was already dead and obviously had been for quite some time. Finding a hated enemy dead by means other than bloody retribution doesn't make for good political hay, especially after so much was spent to find him, so they took the body, verified it was authentic, and then disposed of it in such a way that nobody could verify how the corpse got cold. If anyone comes forward to question the official story, the spin doctors will claim they're just martyr-makers. And, of course, timing the announcement to coincide with Bush's "Mission Accomplished" gives Obama yet another opportunity to claim, "yeah, I'm soooo much better than that other guy."

Of course, I don't actually believe any of this - more likely they just wanted to get that piece of crap off their ship, and/or dispose of it in such a way as to insure no one would ever be able to recover any portion of it. I just think it makes a good story, if you believe in conspiracy theories.

Now, me - if I were in charge I'd have cut off the head, defleshed it, bronzed it and brought it home. I'd build a memorial wall on ground zero and set the skull in an alcove. It would be the first alcove in a wall containing thousands. Above the wall, in bold letters, in every tongue known to man, would be the words, "Enemies of the Innocents." I'd also set the wall up so it faced towards the United Nations building. Maybe that'd get the point across - if you make your political statements by killing people, we have a place set aside for you.

As to the topic of WMDs and whether or not we found any, I believe that is really a matter of perception. We didn't find anything big and gnashy with "DEATH TO THE INFIDEL" plastered on the side. In fact it was always somewhat naive to think we would find anything like that. It was a foregone conclusion that the moment the ground war started anything Sadam was sitting on would end up buried in the desert somewhere - he's done it before. However, as I understand it, we did find tons of HazMat equipment, mobile chemical labs, excessive amounts of industrial strength insecticides, and artillery shells all in close proximity to each other, not to mention the 500 tons of yellow cake uranium Sadam had.

[eldargal]

Any moderately developed on the planet has the materials to produce WMD, and that yellowcake was known and had been monitored by the IAEA since 1992 and had in fact been transferred to Russia where it was subject to isotopic dilution rendering it useless for weaponisation. The fact is we knew Saddam had weapons of WMD for various reason I won't go into here, we also know most were destroyed/seized/given away (allegedly to Syria) in between the first and second Gulf wars.


None of this has anything to do with Osama Bin Laden however, there was no ambiguity in that case.

[Hive Mind]

LMAO. You two really swallow propaganda whole don't you? It's ok that there is no evidence at all, you just know. Sure thing.

[eldargal]

Did you even read my post? I just said there was no evidence Saddam had WMD before the second War. We do know he USED to have it because he used it against Iran and a great deal of it was seized by UNSCOM between 1992-1998 and what remained (estimated at some 5% of the former total) was believed to have been passed on to Syria. To sum it up in simple terms:

Saddam had WMD.
He used it.
It was taken from him/disposed of 1992-1998.
He no longer had WMD 1992/8-2002.
The US and Britain said he had WMD to justify the war 2002-2003. This was an outright lie.

[Skragger]

Assuming first that the corpse in question actually is that of Osama Bin Laden, if I were to suspect any sort of conspiracy here, it'd be that they found Osama's body. He was already dead and obviously had been for quite some time.

Very good point. Lets not forget he did have kidney dialysis, and to maintain yourself you need a lot of medications, and a rather excitngly large machine. There's no way he could have survived for what.. 6? 7? years in a cave without a dialysis machine. If he did manage to get a machine, get it powered, and have access to the plethora of medications needed, then the US screwed up bad by missing all of that stuff, we're talking critically failing a search/spot check here.

Im still annoyed they couldn't have waited 24 more hours to make the announcement, the Canadian election to evict the babyeater is today and now I don't know which coverage to be watching! :mad:

Edit: I'ma go watch the election, watching Americans party over finding a long dead body is pretty boring, and sad...

[eldargal]

It was a 'luxury compound', he hasn't been in caves for a very long time. Which isn't to say he wasn't already dead but I doubt it, why leave his body sitting around a house for some period of time in defiance of burial practise. Strangely enough what led the US to him seems to be the complete lack of electronic communications from the compound over a long period of time despite signs of habitation.

[Skragger]

Now, I'm not much of a consipricy theorist - I find them silly. But something about what I've been reading is causing my highly trained "Insurance Sense" to tingle. And not in a pleasant way.

They've disposed of the body without a) releasing an official autopsy, or b) allowing a third party to preform a second opinion autopsy. Its like.. someone saying "I went to a chiropractor today!" and handing me a receipt with no name or date on it. Are there pictures of the body?

Im not trying to say "z0mg-e! itz totally not Usama! like.. wtf they always lyin to uses!", I'm sure its him, I'm just wondering the cause of death.

[Bigred]

They were not screwing around...

Administration leaders kept the intelligence secret even from UK, Canadian, and Australian allies till the operation was over. Informed Congress shortly before the operation began.

Tapped SEAL Team Six and put them directly under Panetta's command at Langley
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/02/osama-bin-laden-dead-inside-raid-that-killed-him_n_856158.html

Team was sent in with orders to kill, not capture:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/02/osama-bin-laden-dead-kill_n_856211.html

[eldargal]

That conflicts with earlier reports that they asked him to surrender, not saying its wrong but it would be nice to get some clarification.

[Grailkeeper]

I think he should have been put on trial like nuermburg, but that might just be my legal backround. I can see why some people would disagree.

On the other hand I'm no conspiracy theorist but(and there's always a but) that Live blogging of the whole thing seems very strange. Who Blogs in englih in pakistan, and how did the world hea r about it so quickly?

I wonder if they'll ever release the identity of his killer- that guy will get so many drinks/ ladies but have to lok over his shoulder for the rest of his life.


Skragger From What I've read he was shot in the head. Not much need for a second opinion there.

[Bigred]

As for the conspiracy thing, no way.

They choose burial at sea so there is no location to become a shrine for potential followers. They got the body and DNA tested it. There wil be plenty of forensic and video doumentation of the the entire process from the operation, to the autopsy/burial. They will certainly release it in time, well after the fact once the impact has died down.

If one wants to fake such a thing, one should wait till 2 weeks before election day.

Also, yeah I'm thinking all the members of that SEAL team are going to bet the biggest medals the President can pin on their chests (in a private ceremony to protect their identities).

[scadugenga]

I got the call last night and watched the reports.

I can't say I felt joy.

I can't say I felt relief, nor can I say I felt a sense of grim justice.

I did feel that we finally found some sense of closure.

Of course, that sense of closure was marred a bit by the idiot TV reporter saying over and over "It's been more than 10 years since 9/11."

doh...

I don't know that it was justice served. It was, however, needed.

And I can completely understand why there was a quick burial at sea, with religious rites observed.

If you can't find the grave, you can't a) enshrine it, or b) deface it. If there was a long drawn out protracted burial, hell, even if they took him alive and he was put on trial--you have all the makings of martyrdom. He'd become a tangible symbol.

This way? Poof, he's gone. Quietly and with no fanfare--hopefully to be forgotten in due course.

[Necron2.0]

It was a 'luxury compound', he hasn't been in caves for a very long time. Which isn't to say he wasn't already dead but I doubt it ...

Oh, I doubt it too. I was just throwing it out there, because it sounded like a good story ... if we're talking conspiracy theories anyway. However, I should have been clearer. Instead of saying "found the body," maybe "exhumed the body" would have been clearer.

As for WMDs, I don't want to make a big deal of it. Frankly I don't care if they were there or not, but someone suggested they were nothing but lies. Personally, I think both sides were lying. I think the Administration fudged the truth when they said there definitely were WMDs in Iraq and the "fact finders" set their definition of WMDs so narrowly that crates of WWI mustard gas would only register as sausage condiments. The only really salient points are Sadam had had them, he had used them, he wanted more and he was not cooperating with UN inspectors. That was more than enough reason to take him out. Of course, I would have rather he'd been assassinated, with a calling card left on his chest for those following him saying "play nice or die." Political considerations, however, get in the way of sound military decisions.

The only other thing I'd take exception to is the notion that the uranium Sadam had couldn't be weaponized. It's true he couldn't make a nuclear bomb (it wouldn't have mattered if it were pure or not - he hadn't the facilities to do it), but unless it was no longer radioactive, he could have easily made several dirty bombs.

[eldargal]

Well I don't know about the yellowcake, the report I found said it was rendered 'relatively harmless' so it all depends on what the definition of relatively is.:rolleyes:

[Skragger]

Now all we need to watch out for is.. ZOMBIE OSAMA! :eek:

[Denzark]

1. I think it is possible to have justice and revenge at the same time, so for me this fits the bill. I don't think it humane to lock someone up for their entire life, I don't think there is a sufficient sentence for instigating 3000+ murders so I think this is good news. What an excellent bank holiday weekend. It has made up for me losing that apocalypse battle.

2. Why bury the body? As Bigred said. The BBC reports that DNA has 99.9% confirmed that it was Bin Laden. Why would they show the body; if they had this would have been called offensive. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. How do they get DNA to prove it? Well very few people will have clearance to know that. Quite simply, if you think the gubment needs to offer a burden of proof, you would surely need AQ to offer a similar burden of proof that he is alive - unless you are a sicko who would believe Islamic fundamentalists before a western democratic government.

3. WMD? Again, you need a knowledge in depth of intelligent matters. Was the casus belli an outright lie, or just crap Int? My understanding of Gulf 2 was that we were in a state of cease fire from Gulf 1, and that he breached the resolutions in late 90's when we bombed his air assets whilst enforcing the no-fly zone, and again in 2003 - he had Al Samood 2 missiles, which had an effective range further than what was allowed him; this resolution breach was sufficient to go in alone, regardless of WMD. Remember the 15 minute figure? If he had WMD (which he did in Gulf 1) he could definitely have readied battlefield artillery shells inside this figure, so if we didn't know he had got rid of them (in which case why did he not let Hans Blix of Team America fame have an unrestricted access to all sites?) we could only assume he still had them.

4. having spoken to several genuine indigenous Iraqis in Iraq, who all thanked me for our country's part in removing Saddam, I think it was a morally reighteous thing to do irrespective of WMD - Saddam was rotten and if you're religious, then Uday, Qusay and Saddam are now daisy chaining in hell with Osama. If you'er an atheist, we've made worm's meat of them. Good riddance.

[DarkLink]

Honestly I have to agree. One of my history professors, in fact, talked about why we invaded Iraq, based on accounts of the behind-the-scenes discussion going on between Bush and his top advisors. It had nothing to do with WMDs or oil or any of that. It was, effectively, a massive change in policy that the Bush administration saw a chance to enact.

One of the reasons that the middle east is such a messed up place is because the western nations (initially the British and europe, then America after WWII) were supporting the chaotic and violent environment so long as we got our oil and had some control over the local regimes. When one of the nations got uppity, we would organize a coup and put another dictator in control, someone who would listen to us at least for another decade or so. It's how Saddam got into power.

The Bush administration, however, saw this as an opportunity to change that. Instead of installing a new dictator, they took the opportunity to install a true democracy instead, something far, far more difficult to do. The hope was that instead of just another genocidal dictator, Iraq would become a free nation and ally, and in the long run it would be a seed of democracy to bring relative peace to the area. All Bush had to do was find an excuse to go to war, and the terrorist attacks and Saddam's behavior provided that.

Now, a decade later, we're still only just starting to see the results of the war, with the uprisings in Libya and Egypt and elsewhere.

The Iraq invasion might have been bloody and expensive for very little direct gain for anyone in the short run, but with any luck it might just be the spark needed to change the environment in the middle east. There's still a long and very tough road ahead, though.



Incidentally, Saddam played up the threat of WMD's himself, and denied access to UN inspectors, because those weapons were a bluff to keep Iran from fighting. Iran and Iraq don't exactly get along very well, and they kinda had their own little cold war going on. Had Saddam allowed the UN to call his bluff, it very well could have resulted in another Iran-Iraq war.


https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/224051_10150183881421777_589666776_7363523_6154864 _n.jpg

I might not care for some of Obama's policies, but this is an awesome picture. And birthers are idiots. Really. It's not even that they're stupid. It's that they are intentionally stupid, they dislike Obama so much.



They choose burial at sea so there is no location to become a shrine for potential followers.

Also, in the words of an unnamed official, "Finding a country willing to accept the remains of the world's most wanted terrorist would have been difficult".


Also, Osama was buried so quickly because of traditional Islamic burial rituals, supposedly. You're not supposed to leave a body sitting around for longer than needed, so once they got the DNA samples they needed the gave him an Islamic funeral and buried him at sea.

[eldargal]

The kind of countries that would have wanted his remains wouldn't be the sort of country we would want to have them either. They could set up a shrine or something.

Personally I think the biggest scandal of all this is the fact tha the US didn't tell Pakistan that Osama was living near Islamabad. It's almost like they suspected the Pakistan military and government of being so monstrously corrupt that they would warn Osama that the US had found him.:rolleyes:

[Grailkeeper]

they did the exact same with Adolf Eichmann's Ashes. They even went so far as to build him a personal crematorium, so as not to contaminate anyone elses ashes.


Mind you Israel did manage to snatch him and put him on trial for the whole world to see.

[DrLove42]

They didn't tell pakistan for the same reason the helicopters flew 100 miles beforehand. A helicopter taking off, gets seen and leaked. Pakistan's military IS enourmously corrupt and someone would have got him out. 2 minutes notice and he'd have been gone

As for body disposal they don't need a terrorist shrine, other than some sort of a honey trap for some extremists it'd be a bad idea.

As for speed of the body, Islam requires burial within 24 hours unless an autopsy is required. Seeing as 2 bullets in the head is a pretty obvious CoD no autopsy was required, he had to be buried. DNA and facial recognition were done, then buried

Not honouring his reilgions will, would mark you as being a lesser man (or nation) and have worse reprecussions

[Brass Scorpion]

Bin Laden sought to bankrupt America (and nearly did)

http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/05/03/6576196-bin-laden-sought-to-bankrupt-america-and-nearly-did

http://www.polls.newsvine.com/_vine/images/users/600/laura-conaway/6576324.jpg


That big blue part belongs to President George W. Bush.

Great countries fall because their economies fail, our pal Ezra Klein writes today. Osama bin Laden set out to bankrupt America, betting that American leaders would spend trillions -- every last cent in the Treasury -- on trying to defeat him:

[I]t isn't quite right to say bin Laden cost us all that money. We decided to spend more than a trillion dollars on homeland security measures to prevent another attack. We decided to invade Iraq as part of a grand, post-9/11 strategy of Middle Eastern transformation. We decided to pass hundreds of billions of dollars in unpaid-for tax cuts and add an unpaid-for prescription drug benefit in Medicare while we were involved in two wars. And now, partially though not entirely because of these actions, we are deep in debt. Bin Laden didn't — couldn't — bankrupt us. He could only provoke us into bankrupting ourselves. And he came pretty close.

All told, we lost twice as many American troops in the two declared wars that followed 9-11 as we lost people on 9-11 itself. We've spent an approximately crazy amount on the wars themselves. To recover from this, Republicans now want to cut taxes for the wealthy and end Medicare as we know it. And that's where we are, year 10.

On the show: America after 9-11 (remember when your family could meet you at the airport gate?).

[Necron2.0]

They didn't tell pakistan for the same reason the helicopters flew 100 miles beforehand. A helicopter taking off, gets seen and leaked. Pakistan's military IS enourmously corrupt and someone would have got him out. 2 minutes notice and he'd have been gone

I think Eldargal was being sarcastic there.

[Necron2.0]

@Brass Scorpion

I would really take anything coming from Rachel Maddow with a mountain of salt. She's a smarmy smug liar and a terribly transparent one at that. Regarding the debt and who's most responsible, this is from the Wall Street Journal:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704320104575015072822042394.html

By comparison, from the day Mr. Obama took office last year to the end of the current fiscal year, according to the Office of Management and Budget, the debt held by the public will grow by $3.3 trillion. In 20 months, Mr. Obama will add as much debt as Mr. Bush ran up in eight years.

Mr. Obama's spending plan approved by Congress last February calls for doubling the national debt in five years and nearly tripling it in 10.

[Morgan Darkstar]

@Brass Scorpion

I would really take anything coming from Rachel Maddow with a mountain of salt. She's a smarmy smug liar and a terribly transparent one at that. Regarding the debt and who's most responsible, this is from the Wall Street Journal:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704320104575015072822042394.html

Hmm an article by Karl Rove,

we can trust that to be unbaised then :rolleyes:

[DarkLink]

Oh, hey, someone posts some crap about "it's all the Republican's fault" and the thread starts to go downhill.

Seriously people, if you can define your political beliefs in one word, or who you believe is at fault for the world's problems in one word , then you are part of the problem.


But if we're going to be pointing fingers, I'm gonna go with this: http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/bluest-states-also-most-debt-highly-unionized-and-solidly-democrat-that039
http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/FDR-s-Policies-Prolonged-Depression-5409.aspx
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704604704576220491592684626.html
http://mises.org/freemarket_detail.aspx?control=258
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704116404576262761032853554.html?m od=ITP_opinion_0
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704050204576219073867182108.html?K EYWORDS=takers#printMode


Edit: And just for fun: http://www.mainstreet.com/slideshow/lifestyle/drunkest-states-america

[Necron2.0]

Hmm an article by Karl Rove,

we can trust that to be unbaised then :rolleyes:

I really don't want to drag this into something completely off topic. Going back to Brass Scorpion's post, Osama may very well have been trying to bankrupt the US economy. Given his chosen target and the timing of it, that actually seems quite likely. The only issue I had was the Scorp's source isn't know to be very reliable. While you may not like him or necessarily agree with his politics, Karl Rove knows what he's talking about from first hand experience. In contrast, Rachel Maddow is known to be both a hypocrit and a liar.

For reference:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQ7r5ivupTU

[Morgan Darkstar]

I really don't want to drag this into something completely off topic. Going back to Brass Scorpion's post, Osama may very well have been trying to bankrupt the US economy. Given his chosen target and the timing of it, that actually seems quite likely. The only issue I had was the Scorp's source isn't know to be very reliable. While you may not like him or necessarily agree with his politics, Karl Rove knows what he's talking about from first hand experience. In contrast, Rachel Maddow is known to be both a hypocrit and a liar.



Hey im english, so really not that qualified to argue about US politics. I just thought that the author of the article being Karl Rove was humorous.

However i do beleve anything coming from a republican about a democrat president is likely to be biased as would anything coming from a democrat about a republican president.

regarding Rachel Maddow never heard of her before today that video did not prove hippocacy it only proves that the extremes of the democrat and republican parties supporters are as dumb as each other.

anyway back on topic Osama is dead! long time coming

[Brass Scorpion]

Bin Laden’s war against the U.S. economy

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/bin-ladens-war-against-the-us-economy/2011/04/27/AFDOPjfF_blog.html#pagebreak


Bin Laden’s war against the U.S. economy
By Ezra Klein
Posted at 08:56 AM ET, 05/03/2011

Did Osama bin Laden win? No. Did he succeed? Well, America is still standing, and he isn’t. So why, when I called Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, a counterterrorism expert who specializes in al-Qaeda, did he tell me that “bin Laden has been enormously successful”? There’s no caliphate. There’s no sweeping sharia law. Didn’t we win this one in a clean knockout?

Apparently not. Bin Laden, according to Gartenstein-Ross, had a strategy that we never bothered to understand, and thus that we never bothered to defend against. What he really wanted to do — and, more to the point, what he thought he could do — was bankrupt the United States of America. After all, he’d done the bankrupt-a-superpower thing before. And though it didn’t quite work out this time, it worked a lot better than most of us, in this exultant moment, are willing to admit.

Bin Laden’s transition from scion of a wealthy family to terrorist mastermind came in the 1980s, when the Soviet Union was trying to conquer Afghanistan. Bin Laden was part of the resistance, and the resistance was successful — not only in repelling the Soviet invasion, but in contributing to the communist super-state’s collapse a few years later. “We, alongside the mujaheddin, bled Russia for 10 years, until it went bankrupt,” he later explained.

The campaign taught bin Laden a lot. For one thing, superpowers fall because their economies crumble, not because they’re beaten on the battlefield. For another, superpowers are so allergic to losing that they’ll bankrupt themselves trying to conquer a mass of rocks and sand. This was bin Laden’s plan for the United States, too.

“He has compared the United States to the Soviet Union on numerous occasions — and these comparisons have been explicitly economic,” Gartenstein-Ross argues in a Foreign Policy article. “For example, in October 2004 bin Laden said that just as the Arab fighters and Afghan mujaheddin had destroyed Russia economically, al Qaeda was now doing the same to the United States, ‘continuing this policy in bleeding America to the point of bankruptcy.’ ”

For bin Laden, in other words, success was not to be measured in body counts. It was to be measured in deficits, in borrowing costs, in investments we weren’t able to make in our country’s continued economic strength. And by those measures, bin Laden landed a lot of blows.

Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz estimates that the price tag on the Iraq War alone will surpass $3 trillion. Afghanistan likely amounts to another trillion or two. Add in the build-up in homeland security spending since 9/11 and you’re looking at yet another trillion. And don’t forget the indirect costs of all this turmoil: The Federal Reserve, worried about a fear-induced recession, slashed interest rates after the attack on the World Trade Center, and then kept them low to combat skyrocketing oil prices, a byproduct of the war in Iraq. That decade of loose monetary policy may well have contributed to the credit bubble that crashed the economy in 2007 and 2008.

Then there’s the post-9/11 slowdown in the economy, the time wasted in airports, the foregone returns on investments we didn’t make, the rise in oil prices as a result of the Iraq War, the cost of rebuilding Ground Zero, health care for the first responders and much, much more.

But it isn’t quite right to say bin Laden cost us all that money. We decided to spend more than a trillion dollars on homeland security measures to prevent another attack. We decided to invade Iraq as part of a grand, post-9/11 strategy of Middle Eastern transformation. We decided to pass hundreds of billions of dollars in unpaid-for tax cuts and add an unpaid-for prescription drug benefit in Medicare while we were involved in two wars. And now, partially though not entirely because of these actions, we are deep in debt. Bin Laden didn’t — couldn’t — bankrupt us. He could only provoke us into bankrupting ourselves. And he came pretty close.

It’s a smart play against a superpower. We didn’t need to respond to 9/11 by trying to reshape the entire Middle East, but we’re a superpower, and we think on that scale. We didn’t need to respond to failed attempts to smuggle bombs onto airplanes through shoes and shampoo bottles by screening all footwear and banning large shampoo bottles, but we’re a superpower, and our tolerance for risk is extremely low. His greatest achievement was getting our psychology at least somewhat right.

In the end, of course, bin Laden was just another bag of meat and bones, hiding in a walled compound in Pakistan, so deeply afraid of death that he tried to use his wife as a shield when the special forces came for him. But he understood the mind of the superpower well enough to use our capabilities against us. He may not have won, but he did succeed, at least partially.

But then, we can learn from our mistakes. He can’t.
by Ezra Kein

[DarkLink]

Hey im english, so really not that qualified to argue about US politics.

Most Americans aren't, either.

[Brass Scorpion]

Hilarious.

The Colbert Report
‎"His million dollar compound was less than 40 miles from Pakistan's captial. That's like escaping Washington D.C. by hiding out in Baltimore, except that Abbottabad is much less dangerous than Baltimore." -- Stephen Colbert

http://bit.ly/jxLydQ


http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lkllzx7MzE1qgv8qvo1_400.gif

----------------------------------

If you missed the Daily Show last night you missed a real treat with some hilarious graphics. You can see some of them at the link below. My favorite was, "Hairy Plotter and the Deathly Hello"
http://www.thedailyshow.com/

Jon Stewart on Osama bin Laden's death: 'We're back, baby!'

http://popwatch.ew.com/2011/05/03/jon-stewart-osama-bin-laden/

http://joyhog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/large-e1304442989162.jpg
-------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.theonion.com/articles/violent-death-of-human-being-terrific-news-for-onc,20294/?utm_medium=promobar&utm_campaign=recirculation
May 2, 2011
Violent Death Of Human Being Terrific News For Once

Osama Bin Laden: Death Of A Mother F%$%#r
http://www.theonion.com/articles/osama-bin-laden-death-of-a-mother-****er,20293/?utm_medium=promobar&utm_campaign=recirculation

http://o.onionstatic.com/images/articles/article/20294/bin_jpg_630x1200_upscale_q85.jpg

[DarkLink]

A few interesting little details (source (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1383074/Osama-Bin-Laden-dead-US-troops-visited-Pakistan-military-academy-2008.html)):

1. The intel that directly led to Osama's death came from Guantanamo bay

2. Wikileaks might have come close to blowing the whole operation. Turns out releasing top secret government intelligence for the whole world to see has consequences. Maybe that's why it was labeled 'top secret'.

3. They initially planned to just nuke the place (no, not with actual nukes). They decided against it, as he wanted proof of death beyond a doubt.

[Bigred]

I have to admit, I think it was a really gutsy call for any president to make.

With so many standoff attack options, he chooses a surface insertion and grab operation deep inside another nation in a built up urban area, requiring total secrecy and stealth to get in and out. And the intel was still not 100% that OBL was there.

It could have gone very wrong...

[eldargal]

Yup, mocking the way the worlds media seems to be feigning surprise and making 'tut tut' noises over the fact that they left Pakistan out of it. Hardly anyone within the US guvmint knew about it, let alone the Pakistani guvmint.


I think Eldargal was being sarcastic there.

[Grailkeeper]

Does anyone else feel that they'll wake up in a couple of weeks and find it was all a dream, and Bin Laden was actually in the shower?

[Denzark]

It was a surreal weekend, wasn't it? I wonder if Mr President waited until the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge was hitched, so as not to distract from their news...

[eldargal]

I wondered that myself, either way I'm sure their Royal Highnesses were thrilled to have the attention taken off them so soon after the wedding. With any luck it will continue to distract until they can head off to their secret honeymoon destination.

Grailkeeper, I hope not, no girl wants to wake up to Bin Laden in her shower/bath.

Can I start calling him Osama has-bin Laden now or would that be vulgar?

[Denzark]

No, that is quite droll my dear. I am given to understand Pakistan may be only a third world country, but at least they get their bins taken out on a bank holiday weekend.

[Farseer Uthiliesh]

It was a surreal weekend, wasn't it? I wonder if Mr President waited until the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge was hitched, so as not to distract from their news...

I heard that they were advised that the attack was going ahead, and hence, why the couple delayed the honeymoon.

[Bigred]

Damn! This an amazing picture of all the senior administration staff watching the mission unfold. Just look at those expressions. One for the history books.

[Necron2.0]

Damn! This an amazing picture of all the senior administration staff watching the mission unfold. Just look at those expressions. One for the history books.

What I love most about that picture is, here you have the various "important" leaders sitting around looking various shades of clueless, and the one solitary man in uniform is there, head down, getting the job done.

[Bigred]

Dont forget the 4-Star Army Chief-of-Staff in the khaki right behind the Air Force one-star Brigadier General. You know its a tough room when the Brigadier General is the lowing ranking guy in there working the keyboard.

[Grailkeeper]

What I love most about that picture is, here you have the various "important" leaders sitting around looking various shades of clueless, and the one solitary man in uniform is there, head down, getting the job done.



Or being the first to update his facebook

[Necron2.0]

Dont forget the 4-Star Army Chief-of-Staff in the khaki right behind the Air Force one-star Brigadier General. You know its a tough room when the Brigadier General is the lowing ranking guy in there working the keyboard.

Ah. Missed the stars. Hmm. He seems a bit out of uniform, though. Normally there'd be a branch insignia and theater ribbons above the pocket on the left side of the shirt and a name tag above the pocket on the right. Maybe some of that would be on a jacket if he had been wearing one, but still ... he looks a bit under-accessorized.

[EDIT: BTW, that's not the Army Chief-of-Staff. I had to look him up. That's Admiral Mike Mullen, and he should have the Navy insignia pin above his left shirt pocket.]


Or being the first to update his facebook

OH! OK. Busted, you got me. :)

[Bigred]

Ahh, k, got it.

I would assume the Admiral's jacket with all the bling is off camera somewhere in that room.

Did you also notice that they pixelated whatever image is on the table in front of Hillary?

[Denzark]

Poor Hilary. She opened her laptop only to find a print of one of her and Bill's 'special' photos. She is studiously watching the bad guys get capped whilst hoping no one notices.

Luckily this has been pixellated as Chelsea is now the foxy Clinton...

[Farseer Uthiliesh]

Did you also notice that they pixelated whatever image is on the table in front of Hillary?

It's Codex Necrons.

[Brass Scorpion]

Some American "skeptics" are too dumb to believe bin Laden is dead, but his "buddies" in Al Qaeda are admitting it.

http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/05/06/6596223-never-mind-the-head-on-the-pike

Never mind the head on the pike
By Laura Conaway
-
Fri May 6, 2011 9:03 AM EDT


Al Qaeda has admitted what the deathers may never: Osama bin Laden is dead. "We stress that the blood of the holy warrior sheik, Osama bin Laden, God bless him, is precious to us and to all Muslims and will not go in vain," the group said, in a new statement. "We will remain, God willing, a curse chasing the Americans and their agents, following them outside and inside their countries. . . Soon, God willing, their happiness will turn to sadness. Their blood will be mingled with their tears."

Terrorist posturing notwithstanding, this one's almost over, former Naval intelligence officer Malcolm Nance told us last night. Al Qaeda had already been swept aside in the pro-democracy Arab Spring. Now, with the death of bin Laden, al Qaeda unravels into history. "Will they actually carry out operations? Quite possible," Mr. Nance said. "Will they be successful? In some occasions, they might be. But do they have a future in the Muslim world? Not anymore."

[Necron2.0]

It's Codex Necrons.

I REFUSE to accept Hillary as a Star God. Hive mother, perhaps; Warboss, most definitely; but a Star God? NEVER!!

[Farseer Uthiliesh]

i refuse to accept hillary as a star god. Hive mother, perhaps; warboss, most definitely; but a star god? Never!!



lol

[Necron2.0]

It was a surreal weekend, wasn't it? I wonder if Mr President waited until the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge was hitched, so as not to distract from their news...

I wouldn't bet on it. That would require a level of class that our current Commander in Cheese just does not possess. Consider - when the Prime Minister visited back in 2009, he brought gifts that included an ornamental desk pen holder made from the oak timbers of the Victorian era anti-slaver ship, the HMS Gannet. Wood from the Gannet's sister ship, the HMS Resolute, were used to make the desk in the Oval Office.

What did Obama give the Prime Minister in return? The Walmart collection of 25 classic American films on DVD. Woo-Hoo!!

[Denzark]

Yes but that was Gordon Brown. No one in the UK except those who are insane enough to live in a cage they fling their dung at the bars of, likes Gordon Brown.

[Necron2.0]

Perhaps. As someone from Gods own country, it is entirely your prerogative to act and react to him that way. Over here, however, regardless of who he might be privately, he is first and foremost the Prime Minister of the UK. A slight against him here, on US soil, is a slight against his office and the UK itself, not the man. Our President embarrassed us in front of the entire world. He was the quintessential ugly American.

[eldargal]

Yes that really was unforgivable behaviour, completely amateurish. For someone so keen on building relationships as Obama claims to be to snub an old ally like that was very poor form. Even if it was Brown, whom as Denzark says, no one likes.
Personally I have this irrational dislike for governments and Chancellors of the Exchequer who seem to actively try and bankrupt the nation.:rolleyes:

The DVDs didn't work on British players either apparently.

[Hive Mind]

They found porn in the 'compound'. Allegedly. I mean, I say allegedly because there's no evidence at all that it's actually true but that doesn't seem to be a major bar to something being held as truth around here.

[eldargal]

Oh, for gods sake get over it, evan Al-Qaeda have confirmed he is dead.:rolleyes: It was blatently obvious to all but the meanest intelligence why the American government wouldn't make this up, and they didn't.

[Hive Mind]

LMAO, is that your standard of proof? Al'Qaida also say that 'The West' is morally bankrupt and should be destroyed. I guess you think that's true too because I'm eminently sure that you're not just going along with it because they're saying something you want to hear.

You're obviously welcome to believe anything you like but for those of us who have to deal with inconsequential things like fact and evidence day-in, day-out it is extremely hard to avoid the fact that there is not a single shred of evidence available to the public to say that i) Osama is at all dead or ii) that those Seal chaps did indeed shoot an unarmed pensioner dead in a stunning display of bravado.

Where's Denzark? We need more anecdotal evidence, irrelevancies, self-aggrandisement and ad hominen attacks to truly clear this one up.

[eldargal]

Rght, because the self sworn arch-enemy of America is totally going to go along with their lies, because a great psychological victory for the Americans is so in their interests.:rolleyes: If you can't see how pathetic and desperate this argument is you have some serious issues.

[Denzark]

Haven't seen Hive Mind for a while,
Was he recovering from a troubling pile?
Possibly on his summer hols,
He hasn't been to bore us on BoLS

Poor old Hive Mind, upset you can see,
Because the ruling class said no to AV.
Now he denies the Osama truth
He thinks Al Qaeda admission isn't quite the proof

He's lucky I lower myself to talk to this troll,
I normally don't with chippy proles
Who like to make out they are quite learn-ed
But most of this is over his head

You come here and sound off with nothing of worth
Hard to tell for why you're on earth
Your attitude is beyond belief
You clearly are an oxygen thief

Now I have a proposal, how does this sound?
I'm going to quit while on moral high ground.
I won't be answering you again,
Too busy here drinking champagne.

Failed in Britain so leaving UK
This hive mind troll is going Canada's way
So ta ta, goodbye, farewell adieu,
I'll still be here but ignoring your poo.

[eldargal]

It's not John Donne*, but I like it.:)


*Not smutty enough.

[scadugenga]

Brava!

Edit: Crap, that was just one word! I could get Duke-enated for that...

Phew, saved by the edit!

[DarkLink]

Hey, I bet Hive Mind is a birther, too. With a bumper sticker that reads '9/11 was an inside job'.

Edit: I just saw his 'Seals shooting unarmed prisoners' comment.

Hive Mind, you have problems. You can make fun of politicians all you want, believe whatever silly conspiracy theories you want, but do not insult the men and women fighting and dying for you. I don't care whether or not you think that the war actually protects you or not, but the main driving motivation for the majority of the armed forces, and particularly special operations, is the desire to protect their country. Taking potshots at them without very good reason is unacceptable.

[Necron2.0]

Personally I have this irrational dislike for governments and Chancellors of the Exchequer who seem to actively try and bankrupt the nation.:rolleyes:

Who are you talking about - Brown or Obama? ;)

+++++++++++

Actually, the real story is there never was an Osama. Yep, it was all a ruse. Oh sure, there was a guy named Osama Bin Laden, and yes, he was that guy in the picture, but he wasn't THE Osama Bin Laden. Recently declassified tapes illustrate this:

Tape 1:
--- Osama: "Gee, wouldn't it be great if we could do something dramatic? Something spectacular like ... Ooh! Like driving a boat full of explosive up to the USS Cole and blowing it up. Wouldn't THAT be something?"

--- Al'Qaedee: "YEAH BOSS! That'd be GREAT! REALLY GREAT!"


Tape 2:
--- Al'Qaedee: "Ok boss, it's done."

--- Osama: "What's done."

--- Al'Qaedee: "That Cole thingy we talked about. We blew it up."

--- Osama: "WHAT?!!"

--- Al'Qaedee: "Yep, blew it right up. BOOOM!"

--- Osama: "Are you @#$%ing SERIOUS?!!"

--- Al'Qaedee: "Uh ... yeah. You told us to do it."

--- Osama: "NO! I said it'd be great if we could. Great Mohamed's Beard! What were you thinking? You do know what happens when you piss off the Americans? Go ask the Japanese! We want the Americans to be stupid and unfocused, like they are now, not ticked off and out for blood. Crap! What are you going to do next ... fly airplanes into the sides of buildings? Oh! I know, let's bomb the Pentagon while were at it. Yeah, that's sure to turn out well. <*sigh*> Excuse me, but I need a drink and some @#$%ing porn."

[Hive Mind]

It's pretty funny that pointing out the truth (that there is not a shred of evidence available to show that Osama is actually dead) means I'm denying the 'truth'. It's funny. Also appreciated are the ad hominen attacks and irrelevant nonsense. Can't say I didn't expect it.

I guess we'll keep on ignoring my post earlier in the thread where I said I wasn't saying that they definitely hadn't killed Osama or that Osama definitely wasn't dead because that's not as fun as taking me out of context and painting me as some crazy conspiracy nut that has David Icke on speed-dial.

What do they say? A small mind is easily filled with faith? Apt.

[Gotthammer]

What do they say? A small mind is easily filled with faith? Apt.

They also say:

The ends always justify the means.

Be strong in your ignorance.

Be grateful of your Master's favour!

The dissident invites only retribution.

So should we believe what you say, after all you tell us to think for ourselves but quote from the scriptures of a totallitarian dictatorship who say total unquestioning obedience is a virtue?
But do they really? What proof do we have of that - obviously we've been sucked in by their plan to make us think that's what they said when there's no proof they really said it aside from them telling you they did. It's genius.

But, what proof do we have that you're really Hive Mind, and not really Osama himself (in hiding in Canada, to many post about it, sorry) trying to sow more doubt and distrust in the west by forcing doubt upon us?

What proof is there that I'm even a real person typing this, not some advanced AI programmed by our secret lizard overlords that live on the moon with Elvis?

How do we know you're not right, and the CIA found out so used their grey-alien tech to brainwash you to make obnoxious, inflamatory posts everywhere about it to make the idea seem ludicrous to everyone else?!


When in doubt, just reply "That's what they WANT you to think!" - foolproof.



And never forget that Freemasons run the country! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pwhFKRhrHM)

[Necron2.0]

The truth is always a matter of faith, regardless of what proof anyone thinks they have. This is like conversations I have with friends on Evolution versus Creation. It all boils down to me not believing the fairy tale in their book, while they don't believe the fairy tale in mine. The reason is, we all get our information from the same source - a book. And we all take it on faith that the writers of those books weren't either delusional or lying themselves. In the end, everyone simply chooses to believe what they believe, and it's never any more intellectual nor sophisticated than that, regardless of subject matter.


[EDIT: Just wanted to add, the ends always do justify the means. Always. If you are honorable, and your ends are honorable, your means will be honorable, due to the nature of who you are and what you seek. If you are dishonorable or your ends are dishonorable, your means are likely dishonorable as well. Therefore, the ends you seek both justify and are justified by your means, while your means will justify you.]

[Hive Mind]

So should we believe what you say, after all you tell us to think for ourselves but quote from the scriptures of a totallitarian dictatorship who say total unquestioning obedience is a virtue?

It is commendable that you do not flinch when something flies over your head like that. Kudos.



When in doubt, just reply "That's what they WANT you to think!" - foolproof.


That's a good point. At least it would be if that was at all what I'd said or even in the same ball-park.

Again, you're all free to believe any old codswallop you like. I require evidence to form my beliefs that's all I'm saying and right now there is less evidence in the public domain to support Osama's death than there is to support the existence of ghosts, yetis, banshees, leprechauns, sasquatch, werewolves, vampires, the Illuminati, faeries, daemons and tasty microwaveable food.

I'd hazard a guess that not many people here believe in those things (unless I've seriously over-estimated the intelligence level and/or level of fantasy immersion around here) and yet most of you seem to believe that Osama was killed. The only difference between the aforementioned beasties and Osama is that you want to believe that Osama is dead. There's no logical distinction to be made between belief in either.

Again, I'm not saying that Osama is definitely not dead, I'm saying that reasonable doubt exists.

[Gotthammer]

It is commendable that you do not flinch when something flies over your head like that. Kudos.


Context, man - it's all about context. I'm sure you'd agree that misrepresenting and (deliberate) misinterpretations of quotes is one of the great scourges of modern vox-pop journalism and culture in general (just look at the recent facebook "Martin Luther King Jr" quote farce for that).

What you quoted, out of its original context and paired with using it as an attack against EG, Denzark, NEcron etc implies that a fool is easily made into a faithful subject (ie they are foolish to swallow everything they see).

The original context of the quote is a Commisar talking about Ogryn's being stupid, but very faithful - not to the Ogryns themselves, or laughing about it to his Commisar buddies, but as a lesson: people who think too much are bad as they're harder to make faithful - think about it, but not too much.

From the commisar's PoV, being faithful is paramount so the quote is not a pejorative. You used it as such, so I was pointing that out.
I mean, posting a 40k quote out of context on a 40k board? Not cool ;)






That's a good point. At least it would be if that was at all what I'd said or even in the same ball-park.

Again, you're all free to believe any old codswallop you like. I require evidence to form my beliefs that's all I'm saying and right now there is less evidence in the public domain to support Osama's death than there is to support the existence of ghosts, yetis, banshees, leprechauns, sasquatch, werewolves, vampires, the Illuminati, faeries, daemons and tasty microwaveable food.

I'd hazard a guess that not many people here believe in those things (unless I've seriously over-estimated the intelligence level and/or level of fantasy immersion around here) and yet most of you seem to believe that Osama was killed. The only difference between the aforementioned beasties and Osama is that you want to believe that Osama is dead. There's no logical distinction to be made between belief in either.

Again, I'm not saying that Osama is definitely not dead, I'm saying that reasonable doubt exists.


For someone who gets annoyed about personal attacks you're pretty quick to lable my beliefs (which I haven't actually stated yet) codswallop, use passive agressive language to imply what I believe (which I haven't said) is akin to stupidity, and for extra irony, outright say I believe Osama is dead. Here I'll quote that bit again for fun (emphasis mine):

"The only difference between the aforementioned beasties and Osama is that you want to believe that Osama is dead."

Do I? Cool, thanks for telling me what I think! Guess I forgot given I've never posted my thoughts on the matter here or elsewhere (unless you can find some proof, I understand that's rather important).
I also appreciate you throwing in the

irrelevant nonsense

in the form of strawmen like

ghosts, yetis, banshees, leprechauns, sasquatch, werewolves, vampires, the Illuminati, faeries, daemons and tasty microwaveable food

because, you know, going on what I actually wrote isn't

as fun as taking me out of contex

and it'd be bad if you did the things you chide the others for, right?


And for the record, I think the entire argument is stupid, and my satire of the extremist views was having a go at how entrenched everyone is, it's just easier to take anything verging on conspiracy nut territory further. And no, I don't think you are, but getting angry at everyone and defensive and attacking anyone else (see above), does you no favours.

[Hive Mind]

For someone who gets annoyed about personal attacks you're pretty quick to lable my beliefs (which I haven't actually stated yet) codswallop, use passive agressive language to imply what I believe (which I haven't said) is akin to stupidity, and for extra irony, outright say I believe Osama is dead. Here I'll quote that bit again for fun (emphasis mine):

"The only difference between the aforementioned beasties and Osama is that you want to believe that Osama is dead."

Do I? Cool, thanks for telling me what I think! Guess I forgot given I've never posted my thoughts on the matter here or elsewhere (unless you can find some proof, I understand that's rather important).
I also appreciate you throwing in the


in the form of strawmen like


because, you know, going on what I actually wrote isn't


and it'd be bad if you did the things you chide the others for, right?


And for the record, I think the entire argument is stupid, and my satire of the extremist views was having a go at how entrenched everyone is, it's just easier to take anything verging on conspiracy nut territory further. And no, I don't think you are, but getting angry at everyone and defensive and attacking anyone else (see above), does you no favours.

None of the text past 'ball-park' was aimed specifically at you.

[Gotthammer]

Damn... looks like we both did it ;)

And it was a really good burn too :(

:p

edit: should have gone with "do you have any proof of that?"

[Hive Mind]

Damn... looks like we both did it ;)

And it was a really good burn too :(

:p

edit: should have gone with "do you have any proof of that?"

My bad really, I should have made the separation clearer.

Apologies.

[Brass Scorpion]

Like all religious fanatics and demagogues, Bin Laden was also a hypocrite. He and his buddies had a huge porn collection. There are lots of good jokes about that floating around, especially the mockup video covers on Bill Maher's New Rules from May 13:
http://realtimewithbillmaher.blogspot.com/2011/05/new-rules-51311.html

[Farseer Uthiliesh]

The truth is always a matter of faith, regardless of what proof anyone thinks they have. This is like conversations I have with friends on Evolution versus Creation. It all boils down to me not believing the fairy tale in their book, while they don't believe the fairy tale in mine. The reason is, we all get our information from the same source - a book. And we all take it on faith that the writers of those books weren't either delusional or lying themselves. In the end, everyone simply chooses to believe what they believe, and it's never any more intellectual nor sophisticated than that, regardless of subject matter.



I have to respectfully disagree. The difference between accepting creationism and accepting evolution, is that the latter does not require faith. It requires a system of thought that accepts current theories are not 'the whole story' and hence require further testing and rigorous self-analysis. Faith in the Bible simply accepts the story as is. No true proponent of evolution would ever say "it's correct because the book says so"; they would likely say, "based upon what evidence we have, our current theories may be the best fit".

This is not to say that religious-minded folk are stupid or weak willed, but their belief system is fundamentally at odds with scientific thought.

[eldargal]

Quite so, for example the better breed of scientist will even admit that God remains a valid hypothesis until the debate is resolved one way or the other. Atheism is classed as a belief system in itself, and rightly so. One reason I call myself an agnostic now is I am disgusted at the religious extremism displayed by so many high profile atheists and their supporters.

Wait, what were we talking about?:rolleyes:

[Necron2.0]

I have to respectfully disagree. The difference between accepting creationism and accepting evolution, is that the latter does not require faith.

Oh no, it definitely does require faith, as much faith as any religion, and that is the problem. This is the part that nobody seems to recognize. I missed it, too. Everything we know has been told to us. Almost nothing we know comes from verifiable first hand experience. In essence, everything we know has come from a book. So ... what makes one book more valid than another? What makes one witness more truthful than another? What make one belief system more palatable than another? For more than a thousand years the Christian model perfectly described the physical world and man's place in it to pretty much everyone's satisfaction. I'm not saying it was correct, in fact it wasn't, but it worked well enough. Today, what we have is a hodge-podge of maybe's, possibly's and God I hope so's. Every single time we've built some new machine or come up with some new procedure for collecting data on something, we've had to revise our theories. Of course, this raises the question, "Why should anyone believe anything we say?" The answer boils down to a single word ... "FAITH." It's annoying, but there it is. Obviously we can never know the precise truth, so we fill in the gaps with faith.

[Farseer Uthiliesh]

Oh no, it definitely does require faith, as much faith as any religion, and that is the problem. This is the part that nobody seems to recognize. I missed it, too. Everything we know has been told to us. Almost nothing we know comes from verifiable first hand experience. In essence, everything we know has come from a book. So ... what makes one book more valid than another? What makes one witness more truthful than another? What make one belief system more palatable than another? For more than a thousand years the Christian model perfectly described the physical world and man's place in it to pretty much everyone's satisfaction. I'm not saying it was correct, in fact it wasn't, but it worked well enough. Today, what we have is a hodge-podge of maybe's, possibly's and God I hope so's. Every single time we've built some new machine or come up with some new procedure for collecting data on something, we've had to revise our theories. Of course, this raises the question, "Why should anyone believe anything we say?" The answer boils down to a single word ... "FAITH." It's annoying, but there it is. Obviously we can never know the precise truth, so we fill in the gaps with faith.



But does not the definition of faith imply " Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence." which in itself is an issue of trust? Science doesn't work that way - it operates by accepting error into its system and establishing various methods of validity (for instance, predictive and concurrent) and reliability. Now, you could argue that this system in itself requires faith, but if we remove the person, and say have a machine testing reality, the system still works.

Again, I'm not saying you are blind or ignorant or deluded, but what I am saying is that science is a process that does not need belief at all.

[Brass Scorpion]

Hilarious Bill Maher video comments about Bin Laden's continued plots against the US:

https://www.facebook.com/#!/video/video.php?v=211252582228310&oid=62507427296&comments

[Necron2.0]

But does not the definition of faith imply " Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence." which in itself is an issue of trust? Science doesn't work that way ....

Ah, but yes it does. Faith is as much a part of science as it is religion. The scientific process (whose roots are in monasteries, by the way) may prescribe a reasoned application of logic, but that application has not been historically consistent. Consider these: Piltdown man, cold fusion, Dr. Sokal's nonsense papers, the Rooter paper, Dr. Shinichi Fujimura archaeological research, the discovery of the Tasaday tribe, all the research of Jan Hendrik Schön, and pretty much all the race related research of the 19th century. All of these show fraudulent claims made in the name of science which people vehemently defended as truth, because they wanted to believe. Today we are taking as fact research which has never been thoroughly vetted (including the very processes of evolution itself). One hundred years ago scholars believed that life existed beyond earth. Forty years ago that assumption was that it probably did not. Today, in the scientific community, the assumption has swung back to a general belief that life does exist on other planet, even those of our own solar system. What profound evidence has caused these swings ... none. It's all a matter of faith.

Now, as part of the scientific process, if an event occurs that cannot be duplicated, but for which there were witnesses, the prescribed procedure is to poll the witnesses, collate their data, throw out what is largely speculation and combine the rest into a unified picture describing the event. Well, Christianity has been doing that for 2000 years. That is the foundation of the New Testament and the focus of various ecumenical councils down through the centuries. The Reformation came about as a means to purify the original data source of all the dross that had been added to it over the years. Even today Biblical scholar argue passionately over what books should or should not be included in the Bible, based on the validity of the data source - the connection between the author and the events they have written about. That describes a process that is scientific in nature.

I should mention, I'm not trying to change your beliefs or question your beliefs. You, however, should question your own beliefs from time to time. I do. As Socrates put it, "The unexamined life is not worth living."

[Farseer Uthiliesh]

Piltdown man, cold fusion, Dr. Sokal's nonsense papers, the Rooter paper, Dr. Shinichi Fujimura archaeological research, the discovery of the Tasaday tribe, all the research of Jan Hendrik Schön, and pretty much all the race related research of the 19th century.

Which support my position even more; they show a failure in the ability to use the scientific method. But how can you quote these sources yet ignore the many other religions of the world which show that you are not the only faith? What makes you more right than a Hindi, Muslim or a New Ager?


You, however, should question your own beliefs from time to time. I do. As Socrates put it, "The unexamined life is not worth living."

Didn't I just mention that science questions itself - always has doubt? No offence, but I never attacked you and you now slip an underhanded comment that I'm unquestioning . . . I'd take the scientific method any day than following a book that was written thousands of year ago and accepting it without question.

Anyway, thread hijacked.

[Necron2.0]

Which support my position even more; they show a failure in the ability to use the scientific method.

But the problem is they all were accepted as scientific fact at one point, and in some cases religiously defended. That's all I was saying.


But how can you quote these sources yet ignore the many other religions of the world which show that you are not the only faith? What makes you more right than a Hindi, Muslim or a New Ager?

Nothing. Nothing makes my world views any more real than anyone else's. I'm not defending a religion or any religion. Going back to my first comment, all I said is truth is a matter of faith, because that which we know is either not right or inaccurate. Or, to quote Benjamin Franklin, "Believe none of what you hear and half of what you see."


I never attacked you and you now slip an underhanded comment that I'm unquestioning . . . .

Sincere apologies, that was not my intention at all. It is just that we all get somewhat set in our ways of thinking ... you, me, everyone. It's how we're built. It's natural. Now, I'm not directing this at you, but every so often we all need to step back and ask ourselves, "Is this right?"