Jim Marrs On Obama And Osama

Credibility. When a person who has lied to you countless times tells you something that they think makes themselves look very good, especially during a time when your opinion of them is very low, you would do well to fact check everything they say. When they then tell you that they destroyed the evidence of their claims except for this one test that they have the results from but cannot be repeated…. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice shame on me, fool me enough times and I’ll check the sky if you tell me its blue.

Google Chrome (my favorite browser) translated it.

What article? What argument? All I made was a statement. What do you know of my purpose for speaking? I once knew a man who knew a lot, it turns out everything he knew was wrong.

Exactly. And they sent him into the ocean because no country that it might have been appropriate to send his corpse wanted him. Sure, it’s convenient for them that they can’t get to the body anymore. I doubt they tried too hard to convince any of the countries to take him either. But taking advantage of the situation is not the same thing as proof of a conspiracy. And if they hadn’t respected muslim custom in burial it would have caused a lot more problems for us abroad than respecting it will cause at home. So I think I can pretty safely say I would have done the same.

Bringing Osama back for a trial would have been a huge waist of time and tax payers money. You think Saddams trial was bad. Imagine all of the lawyers involved and jurors, they would’ve been asassinated one at a time. Wheather he died in 2001 or 2011, the fucker is dead, good lets move one. And so what if there’s no proof if he was connected to 9/11, he obvioulsy is a terrorist and admits to that with every video he put out. He was a waist of flesh, good ridens. I hope he’s burning in hell with his 72 virgin demons ripping his ass apart. OBL=POS

Those reports were proven to be inacurate. The GOV itself said that. The truth is, he was NOT using his wife as a shield, as the SEALs shot her in the leg when she lunged for them. Osama was UNARMED. The excuse of “he may have had a suicide vest on” is void because the same excuse could have been used for the wife.

All of you are mad, none of this is real. We live in the matrix and the spoon isn’t really there. Swallow the blue pill and wake up sheeple.

It would almost be worth it if I could watch the tinfoil hat brigade marched onto the cattle cars.

You’ll be marched there too, if you are a “useless eater” (Kissinger’s term).

I’ve been trying to find some tin foil for my hat, but all I can find is aluminum. Conspiracy!

Don’t worry. This is America. It can’t happen here.

Inclination to question all information is not the same thing as reason to believe the information is false. It’s like the difference between an atheist and an atheist: One of them does not believe there is a god, the other believes that there is no god.

I ask again: What reason would anyone have to believe that it might not have been Osama Bin Laden? If you have no specific evidence that points even remotely to that exact conclusion, the idea itself is arbitrary.

Say I have a friend who works for the Pakistani government, and that friend has told me that he knows a guy who looks like Bin Laden and has been pretending to be him and he shows me a copy of a government memo that states it. Now I have reason to believe that the man who was killed on Sunday might have been a fake.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary support. Questioning our government on their claim is one thing, but suggesting any alternate string of events can only come from your imagination.

People believe that the man killed on Sunday was a fake, but there are no reports that suggest he was. Therefore, they believe something they have never read. People believe things that come from their own imaginations all the time without any real-world genesis to produce those ideas.

“I ask again: What reason would anyone have to believe that it might not
have been Osama Bin Laden? If you have no specific evidence that points
even remotely to that exact conclusion, the idea itself is arbitrary.”

I would like to agree with this premise as your overall post is arguing for something I agree with. But honesty compels me to ask about the above quoted from you.

Isn’t that asking someone to prove a negative? Since you used the atheist analogy I’ll put it this way. A theist says “There is a god”. The atheist says “prove it”. Now the onus is on the theist to prove their assertion with evidence as they are the one making the claim, if they cannot prove it then there is no good reason for the atheist to believe their assertion that there is a god.

Now if we take that reasoning and apply it to this situation, as you tried to do. The government says “We’ve killed Bin laden last weekend”. Someone asks “Prove it”. The onus is now on the government to prove their assertion with evidence, if they cannot then there is no good reason for someone to believe their assertion.

A theist might claim the existence of a god by saying “You can’t prove there isn’t a god”

You’ve actually pulled the same thing in the quote above by saying that the government is telling the truth simply because “You have no evidence they didn’t kill Bin Laden”.

In that argument it’s not arbitrary at all. The onus is on the one making the claim to provide the evidence.

Now if someone wishes to go beyond merely not accepting the governments account because they believe there is not enough evidence. Lets say they further claim “Bin Laden was killed in 2001″ THEN the onus is now on them to prove that assertion. Where is the evidence to support that assertion.

“Extraordinary claims require extraordinary support. Questioning our
government on their claim is one thing, but suggesting any alternate
string of events can only come from your imagination.”

I’d agree with this partially. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Questioning our government on their claim is one thing, but suggesting any alternate string of events requires evidence. Lets say that the government has not proved sufficiently to someone that thier narrative is true. That’s fine. But insufficent evidence for the government does not give credence to alternative narrative. Absence of evidence for narrative “A”, s not evidence that narrative “B” is true.

To put it another way. Even if narrative A is false
, you’ve still got all your work ahead of you to prove narrative B.

Let’s see, the Navy Seals are going to use one of their most secret weapons, a stealth helicopter, on a secret mission that never really happened? Bin Laden’s wives are going to make statements about their dead husband in 2011 that you say actually died in 2001? We leave a trail of bodies at the compound (bin Laden’s courier, his son, etc) all as an elaborate ruse?

The stealth helicopter that malfunctioned and had to be blown up was one of the military’s most guarded secrets. It had been rumored but never confirmed – until now! Now everyone who has wanted to make similar equipment has just been given a big boost and you say it’s fake? A stealth helicopter was one of the holy grails of military technology – a way to baffle the sound making it hard to detect directionally, a way to elude radar detection, a way to quiet the engine, etc. Now we have video of kids and adults picking up the parts of this technology which will no doubt be on the way to China soon.

Why would the Obama and the Navy Seals put their reputation on the line for a ruse? All Osama would have to do is to show his face to disprove he was killed. But then again, you claim he was killed in 2001. Why wouldn’t Bush have just done the same thing to boost his legacy. That was one of the biggest failures of his presidency – in addition to starting an unjustified war in Iraq based on lies and deception. If bin Laden had really died in 2001, then Bush could have done the same thing at any point in the next 7 years to show his righteousness. Bush lived for this shit. “Mission Accomplished”? You’re definitely in tin-foil hat territory if you think Osama died in 2001.

It really amazes me the stupidity of this disinformation population. Just when I think Americans might have a chance to get their country back i read these message boards and realize, they are far more fucking gone then they could ever imagnie.

Hey Celery, just saw it was 80% sorry, I was a little off. My bad. Oh, and the science is to accurate. But I guess I’ll just keep saying that everything is a lie till official documents are released. Why would any ever tell us the truth.

No one (not me, anyway) is saying that a raid involving Navy Seals and stealth helicopters didn’t occur. I am just aware of too many conflicting stories about what’s going on here and no side is “proving” anything. There is Dr. Steve R. Pieczenik’s statements that are pretty damning. Several top officials over the years have presumed him dead long ago. WAS bin Laden really SICK at all? In these newly released videos he looks just as healthy as he did in 2001 in his camo coat and gray beard 10 YRS AGO! (yes, that was 2001!) If he was NOT sick then WHO’S LIE was that?? If sick, then was it it Marfan Syndrome?? Was it diabetes? Was it failing kidneys? DID he have dialysis a few times a week?? How is he still living?? None of this is making sense and I am NOT a “BELIEVER” (i.e. Those who believe everyrthing their gov’t tells them, its what they do, they believe and do not question. They are any government’s FAVORITE citizens) I have to ask, I am not gullible. I don’t even trust much of the “Truthers” movements because EVERYONE is spreading spins and disinformation to color it their own way.

Silly Celery, you missed my smirk when I typed the “I guess it MIGHT” geez. I thought it was pretty straight forward with the following sentence. I understand your wanting to question everything and all. This just seems to be not that big of a conspiracy creating sort of thing though. I suppose you saw the video released showing the 2010 Obama in the background with him sitting in front if the TV then right? Seriously, I understand your wanting to not believe things reported. Please remember though, at least in general, that’s what reporting is all about. I know lies can and are told which end up reported as truth, but the guys dead, they just killed him It’s admitted by EVERYONE. Minus Pakistan. But that’s for another thread. What else can you really say?

Lastly, your doubt about the 95% “blowing him away” was correct. I’m sorry for spewing an guesstimate without all facts behind it. It was just that. An educated guess. I wasn’t really THAT far off though. The poll I just read said about 80. But, I suppose you can’t believe any poll that you didn’t do yourself. A report by reporters just can’t be true. Why would it?

How about asking 100 Americans how to spell Osama bin Laden.

Absolutely hilarious stuff. You all crack me up! Stay the course.