Am I a conspiracy theorist (Osama Bin Laden still alive)

[clairobscur]

As mentioned in the title, I have doubts about the death of Osama Bin Laden. Here's why :

Even though I understand that detaining/sending him to trial would have created significant issues (hostage taking, for instance), he still was, quite obviously, the single most important source of informations about Al Qaida, so intelligence services would logically want him alive.

In this situation, wouldn't *stating* that he has been killed while in fact he's secretely detained somewhere be the best of both worlds?


And of course, no evidence that he was actually killed was provided, the pictures of his body not having been released. Providing fake pictures could have been an option, but there's no doubt that such pictures would have been closely studied by many people, and a faked one would probably have been spotted by a number of experts.


So, am I a nutty conspiracy theorist for suspecting that he might not have been, in fact, killed, but instead abducted?

[Blake]

Providing fake pictures could have been an option, but there's no doubt that such pictures would have been closely studied by many people, and a faked one would probably have been spotted by a number of experts.


So, am I a nutty conspiracy theorist for suspecting that he might not have been, in fact, killed, but instead abducted?

These two statements seem to be contradictory. If he was abducted, why not just knock him out, take photos of the body, and say he was dead? There is no way anybody could distinguish an unconscious body from a dead one based upon a photograph.

[Sage Rat]

These two statements seem to be contradictory. If he was abducted, why not just knock him out, take photos of the body, and say he was dead? There is no way anybody could distinguish an unconscious body from a dead one based upon a photograph.

People who were shot to death generally have holes in them.

[Mosier]

As mentioned in the title, I have doubts about the death of Osama Bin Laden. Here's why :

Even though I understand that detaining/sending him to trial would have created significant issues (hostage taking, for instance), he still was, quite obviously, the single most important source of informations about Al Qaida, so intelligence services would logically want him alive.

In this situation, wouldn't *stating* that he has been killed while in fact he's secretely detained somewhere be the best of both worlds?


And of course, no evidence that he was actually killed was provided, the pictures of his body not having been released. Providing fake pictures could have been an option, but there's no doubt that such pictures would have been closely studied by many people, and a faked one would probably have been spotted by a number of experts.


So, am I a nutty conspiracy theorist for suspecting that he might not have been, in fact, killed, but instead abducted?

Unfortunately, yes. Your hypothetical requires dozens (hundreds?) of people to cooperate without spilling it. There were women in the house (and at least one in the same room when bin Laden was killed) who were not taken into custody, but rather turned over to Pakistan after being interrogated for example. There were plenty of people who witnessed the body and burial. It is quite unreasonable to assert that bin Laden might still be alive.

For the record, I agree that bin Laden alive is worth more than bin Laden dead. I wish the squad could have captured him instead of killed him, but I don't doubt that the official story is the actual story.

[Love Rhombus]

People who were shot to death generally have holes in them.

If he was taken alive, why photo him where he was taken? You'd do it somewhere else, with appropriate special effects to simulate death. Not that I think he wasn't killed, the firestorm if he had turned up alive would have been too insane anyway. Now if the compound had gone up in flames and he was reported dead....

[Kobal2]

There were plenty of people who witnessed the body and burial.

But none who knew him personally - just from 10 year old grainy photos and such. There's also the "y'all look alike to me" factor. If (and, granted, that's a big if) there was indeed such a conspiracy, providing a body Bin Ladenish enough for superficial observation wouldn't be too complicated for CIA goons, even more so if the ruse was planned before the raid was even launched.
Besides, the people who witnessed the body and burial were all US military. Which gives them a pretty darn good incentive to keep any doubts they might have quiet.

[Martin Hyde]

Why would Al-Qaeda confirm his death if he wasn't dead?

[newcomer]

So, am I a nutty conspiracy theorist for suspecting that he might not have been, in fact, killed, but instead abducted? It's not a conspiracy theory as understood because it really is irrelevant and non essential. It does not really amount to anything significant. You're safe while you still can flaunt it around as a sign of non-conformance plus it’s a great water-cooler subject.

It's like Jerry in one of Seinfeld episodes says that he sews on his pants the label with size 33 even though he's really 34 :o

[Love Rhombus]

Why would Al-Qaeda confirm his death if he wasn't dead?

Because it was an inside job, man! They get a martyr and dump an obsolete symbol, we get headlines and a feel-good moment. Duh!





:)

[newcomer]

Why would Al-Qaeda confirm his death if he wasn't dead? But... isn't the more interesting question HOW did they confirm?

Did he not show up at the scheduled conference call? His Skype was offline? Did he send audio tape to his cohorts? His Facebook status was updated to "Dead"? CSI Karachi?

How?

[Vinyl Turnip]

O great Wizard of Hypotheticals, illuminate the scary ignorant darkness with your radiant JAQ-o'-lantern!

Oh, that pumpkinlike object is your head? Sorry, nevermind.

[newcomer]

You know Vinyl, in spring of 1992 in my hometown a political party leadership representing Bosnians held a number of meetings regarding the increasingly worrying situation in the country and the town itself. They also had a scribe who took meeting notes and actions.

No need for me to tell you what happened that summer.

Forward 12 years later, one of the major Serb war criminal was in front of a judge defending his case in front of a judge of ICTY. In the weeks leading up to the start of his trial, on the Serb controlled TV news outlets a number of “revealing” documents have been presented including a notebook claimed to contain notes from the meetings of those who already have been dead for 12 years on the direct orders of the guy who was charged. Even TV newscasters and newspaper columnists read or commented selected excerpts that “show” the “true intentions” of Bosniaks in the months leading to a summer of 1992. Essentially the story was that if Serbs did not do what they did they would suffer the fate worse than what they in fact did to Bosniaks.

However, when presented at the court as evidence a separate process was undertaken to establish veracity of the meeting notes. They took weeks of painful and public verification process that almost threatened to overshadow the real issue at the trial. But the judge insisted and after several months it was determined (among other things) that all the “incriminating” notes were in fact added or written over existing notes and they clearly written to misrepresent series of events and clear the accused of any charge. ICTY court rejected that as evidence and the trial continued that found the accused guilty and sentenced him to 18 years in prison.

But, the funny thing was that in Serbian controlled media space there was no mention of the studios review of the evidence and, of course, no word that the whole thing was made up. So, today, if you ask those people they will still point to those made up notes and the “spirit” of it. When you tell them that they were made up with the goal of misrepresenting the reality they start cracking jokes like the one you just did.

[AdmiralCrunch]

So, am I a nutty conspiracy theorist for suspecting that he might not have been, in fact, killed, but instead abducted?

As far as the "abduction" raid in Abbottabad goes, how do you suppose it differs from the official account(according to this piece in the New Yorker (http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/08/08/110808fa_fact_schmidle?currentPage=all))? Specifically, if there's a chance that Osama's wife Amal saw anything that does not line up with the official account, why was she shot in the calf instead of the head a half dozen times?

[Huerta88]

Even though I understand that detaining/sending him to trial would have created significant issues (hostage taking, for instance), he still was, quite obviously, the single most important source of informations about Al Qaida, so intelligence services would logically want him alive.

I'm not sure I agree. (a) he had been somewhat isolated from Qaida for obvious reasons; (b) to the extent he was communicating with them, it was by note, thumb drive, whatever, which -- the odds are pretty high -- were still in his house. They have been confiscated and are being analyzed for hints as to the structure and plans of AQ.

As to past AQ terrorism -- most of it's not a whodunnit. We don't need OBL to tell us how 9/11 was planned, we've pieced that together pretty comprehensively already.

And that's all assuming he would have talked, and would have told the truth.

[Huerta88]

As far as the "abduction" raid in Abbottabad goes, how do you suppose it differs from the official account(according to this piece in the New Yorker (http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/08/08/110808fa_fact_schmidle?currentPage=all))?
That guy had some great access, and it's a great article. Wonder if the military gave the access precisely to quell CTs. If the story's a fake, someone's done a Hell of a job building in highly plausible circumstantial details.

[Vinyl Turnip]

You know Vinyl, in spring of 1992 in my hometown a political party leadership representing Bosnians held a number of meetings regarding the increasingly worrying situation in the country and the town itself. They also had a scribe who took meeting notes and actions.

No need for me to tell you what happened that summer.

Forward 12 years later, one of the major Serb war criminal was in front of a judge defending his case in front of a judge of ICTY. In the weeks leading up to the start of his trial, on the Serb controlled TV news outlets a number of “revealing” documents have been presented including a notebook claimed to contain notes from the meetings of those who already have been dead for 12 years on the direct orders of the guy who was charged. Even TV newscasters and newspaper columnists read or commented selected excerpts that “show” the “true intentions” of Bosniaks in the months leading to a summer of 1992. Essentially the story was that if Serbs did not do what they did they would suffer the fate worse than what they in fact did to Bosniaks.

However, when presented at the court as evidence a separate process was undertaken to establish veracity of the meeting notes. They took weeks of painful and public verification process that almost threatened to overshadow the real issue at the trial. But the judge insisted and after several months it was determined (among other things) that all the “incriminating” notes were in fact added or written over existing notes and they clearly written to misrepresent series of events and clear the accused of any charge. ICTY court rejected that as evidence and the trial continued that found the accused guilty and sentenced him to 18 years in prison.

But, the funny thing was that in Serbian controlled media space there was no mention of the studios review of the evidence and, of course, no word that the whole thing was made up. So, today, if you ask those people they will still point to those made up notes and the “spirit” of it. When you tell them that they were made up with the goal of misrepresenting the reality they start cracking jokes like the one you just did.

Cool story, bro. But I'm not sure how it helps prove that Osama bin Laden is still alive, or how we managed to get al Qaeda to willingly participate in the conspiracy.

[villa]

There is no way anybody could distinguish an unconscious body from a dead one based upon a photograph.

Ask Bill Frist just how much you can remotely diagnose from pictures and video tape.

[Mosier]

Didn't Osama's wife watch him die?

[Jackmannii]

I have it on good authority that Osama is being held captive at NASA's simulated moon landing site along with the 9/11 flight crews and passengers, the Tuskeegee Airmen and Hitler's cloned children. They're all as happy as clams, stoned out of their minds on the CIA's massive stash of crack cocaine.

Go ahead, prove me wrong.

[fumster]

I'd sure hate to call the Seals liars. If the OP decides to do that I'd like to watch.

[Wakinyan]

The main reason for me, which was the first thought that struck me when I heard about the theory that Osama bin Ladin was not shot and killed by American forces, for not believe any such notion, was, "How on earth would the president of the USA, the White House, the Pentagon, risk making a total, global ass of themselves?" It would be the greatest propaganda blunder in modern history if the president said "We killed Osama bin Ladin" and it later inevitably turned out they didn't. That the Obama administration would try such a stunt is simply beyond belief to me. It would be in the ballpark of trying to convince the world that you landed on the moon when you didn't. -- Nope, too dumb. The man got shot like they said. Also, Armstrong walked on the moon.

[newcomer]

Cool story, bro. But I'm not sure how it helps prove that Osama bin Laden is still alive, or how we managed to get al Qaeda to willingly participate in the conspiracy. I don't know how cool it is as my older brother was sitting on most of those meetings.


The story was to illustrate the lengths people will go in falsifying the history and perception and all that with straight face to achieve goals they set for themselves. For these kinds of people it is not a matter of an individual being “in on it” and then “outing” the whole scheme - for them there is no scheme ergo nothing to be in on it and nothing to out. It’s a normal course of action. It is a living paradigm and you can scream all you want - for them, your on the outside.

Further point was that if the bunch of illiterate and crude Balkan lowlifes with tendency to get drunk and overeat on a frequent basis can come up with a paradigm such as as this it is certainly something to consider that a circle of selected individuals holding seats of power and common ideological bent in the most powerful imperial power that World has ever seen can create a paradigm thousands time bulletproof.

[Der Trihs]

The main reason for me, which was the first thought that struck me when I heard about the theory that Osama bin Ladin was not shot and killed by American forces, for not believe any such notion, was, "How on earth would the president of the USA, the White House, the Pentagon, risk making a total, global ass of themselves?" It would be the greatest propaganda blunder in modern history if the president said "We killed Osama bin Ladin" and it later inevitably turned out they didn't. That the Obama administration would try such a stunt is simply beyond belief to me. It would be in the ballpark of trying to convince the world that you landed on the moon when you didn't. -- Nope, too dumb. More like telling the world that you are invading Iraq because of nonexistent WMDs, their nonexistent drone fleet, their nonexistent mobile bioterror labs...Yes, Obama is apparently smarter than Bush was, but let's not pretend that the President and government can't be that dumb.

[Monty]

I'd sure hate to call the Seals liars.

SEAL. All capital letters. Seal is an aquatic mammal.


If the OP decides to do that I'd like to watch.

Same here. But personally, I wish {drat: this isn't in The BBQ Pit so I couldn't use a cool strike-through comment to truly convey my well-founded opinion of} the conspiracy theorists would give their stupidity a rest for at least one day. It's disgusting that they're trotting it out on any day, but especially so on the tenth anniversary of the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

[Vinyl Turnip]

Further point was that if the bunch of illiterate and crude Balkan lowlifes with tendency to get drunk and overeat on a frequent basis can come up with a paradigm such as as this it is certainly something to consider that a circle of selected individuals holding seats of power and common ideological bent in the most powerful imperial power that World has ever seen can create a paradigm thousands time bulletproof.

Fine, a "circle of selected individuals holding seats of power" might do that. Let's hear how, why, and who you think was involved. We already know it would involve a conspiracy of (at minimum) dozens, all the way up to the President himself.

The game of "let's pretend" isn't any fun if you refuse to, you know, pretend.

[tomndebb]

Oh, that pumpkinlike object is your head? Sorry, nevermind.This is not The BBQ Pit and you are way out of line.

Stoip it.

[ /Moderating ]

[Kobal2]

The main reason for me, which was the first thought that struck me when I heard about the theory that Osama bin Ladin was not shot and killed by American forces, for not believe any such notion, was, "How on earth would the president of the USA, the White House, the Pentagon, risk making a total, global ass of themselves?" It would be the greatest propaganda blunder in modern history if the president said "We killed Osama bin Ladin" and it later inevitably turned out they didn't. That the Obama administration would try such a stunt is simply beyond belief to me. It would be in the ballpark of trying to convince the world that you landed on the moon when you didn't. -- Nope, too dumb. The man got shot like they said. Also, Armstrong walked on the moon.

Depends, really. You seem to assume the truth would out a couple years later, with the raid still burning in people's memories ; in which case I suppose it could be indeed damaging.

However, were the ruse to only come to light 30-40 years later (as seems to be the average for that kind of stuff, when sealed secret documents are released or some ageing bureaucrat writes his sensationalist memoirs), who's going to care ? Everybody involved will have left government a long time ago. Al Qaeda might even be a thing of the past by then. I mean really, to give you an example of what I mean, who cared when it turned out that the Gulf of Tonkin incident was a sham all along ? Nobody.
Hell, who cared when it turned out all that Iraq WMD stuff was made up ? Nobody. Ancient history. Too late, what's done is done, move on.

Besides, what propaganda blunder ? Now, if they had announced "Got him !" when in fact he was still out there, then yes, that would be a retarded move headed right for an inevitable trainwreck.
Announcing "Got him dead !" and it later turns out it was really "Got him jailed !" however, what's the big issue ? Intelligence ruse, necessary secrecy of the ongoing investigation/interrogation, the public would not only understand but probably even laud such a thing if it's spun right.

[Death of Rats]

But... isn't the more interesting question HOW did they confirm?

Did he not show up at the scheduled conference call? His Skype was offline? Did he send audio tape to his cohorts? His Facebook status was updated to "Dead"? CSI Karachi?

How?

Not everyone in the compound was killed or taken. The SEALs left behind a number of women and children. Most of whom witnessed the assault and cleanup and would have seen him dead. Even the wife he used as a shield survived and was left behind.

[Otara]

As mentioned in the title, I have doubts about the death of Osama Bin Laden. Here's why :

Even though I understand that detaining/sending him to trial would have created significant issues (hostage taking, for instance), he still was, quite obviously, the single most important source of informations about Al Qaida, so intelligence services would logically want him alive.

In this situation, wouldn't *stating* that he has been killed while in fact he's secretely detained somewhere be the best of both worlds?


And of course, no evidence that he was actually killed was provided, the pictures of his body not having been released. Providing fake pictures could have been an option, but there's no doubt that such pictures would have been closely studied by many people, and a faked one would probably have been spotted by a number of experts.


So, am I a nutty conspiracy theorist for suspecting that he might not have been, in fact, killed, but instead abducted?

You're not a conspiracy theorist for having the initial notion.

You would be if you one of you discounted the kinds of evidence outlined above and still saw it as a probable scenario.

Otara

[Vinyl Turnip]

This is not The BBQ Pit


Yeah, realized that after the fact. Apologies.

[Vinyl Turnip]

Even the wife he used as a shield survived and was left behind.

To avoid lending accidental credence to the "bin Laden is alive" theory, it should be emphasized that the "used his wife as a shield" report seems to have been complete bullshit (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/bin-ladens-wives-children-arrested-in-raid--1-son-killed/2011/05/02/AFwSTuZF_blog.html).

[Blake]

Yeah, realized that after the fact. Apologies.

Yeah, well stoip it of the Moiderator will moider you. :p

[straight man]

The story was to illustrate the lengths people will go in falsifying the history and perception and all that with straight face to achieve goals they set for themselves.
<snip>
Further point was that if the bunch of illiterate and crude Balkan lowlifes with tendency to get drunk and overeat on a frequent basis can come up with a paradigm such as as this it is certainly something to consider that a circle of selected individuals holding seats of power and common ideological bent in the most powerful imperial power that World has ever seen can create a paradigm thousands time bulletproof.
But wait, let's compare. Your story is about some people forging some documents and, with the help of a state-controlled media, convincing a group of people whose own ethnic self-perceptions ride on the forgeries being real, that the forgeries were real. Doesn't sound so impressive stated that way, right? Then add on that the rest of the world didn't believe it, even though all the people who would know better were dead. Contrast that with the Bin Laden case, where the relevant media are not state-controlled, the rest of the world (including supporters of Bin Laden) do believe the story, and people who would know better are still alive. Not really a comparable case, right?

[clairobscur]

These two statements seem to be contradictory. If he was abducted, why not just knock him out, take photos of the body, and say he was dead? There is no way anybody could distinguish an unconscious body from a dead one based upon a photograph.

I'm sure they can be told apart.. Especially since, as mentioned by another poster, you'd expect Bin Laden's corpse to have holes in it.

If he was taken alive, why photo him where he was taken? You'd do it somewhere else, with appropriate special effects to simulate death. ...

I'm sure you could shot pictures that look like he's dead, but there would be a significant risk that experts looking at them could tell they are fake.


Unfortunately, yes. Your hypothetical requires dozens (hundreds?) of people to cooperate without spilling it. [....] There were plenty of people who witnessed the body and burial. It is quite unreasonable to assert that bin Laden might still be alive.

How do you know there were "plenty" of people witnessing the burial at sea? As for the others, even though there would be a number of them, they would all be special forces, intelligence officers and high-ranking officials, the kind of people you would actually expect to not spill the story.



Why would Al-Qaeda confirm his death if he wasn't dead?

Because there was evidences of the storming of the building and that he was nowhere to be found.

[clairobscur]

I'd sure hate to call the Seals liars. If the OP decides to do that I'd like to watch.



Same here. But personally, I wish {drat: this isn't in The BBQ Pit .


I would have no hesitation calling SEAL liars. In fact, I would *expect* them to lie if told to. Go and flame away.


The main reason for me, which was the first thought that struck me when I heard about the theory that Osama bin Ladin was not shot and killed by American forces, for not believe any such notion, was, "How on earth would the president of the USA, the White House, the Pentagon, risk making a total, global ass of themselves?".

Because they wouldn't risk making an ass of themselves? Abducting him instead of killing him would be a sensible move, and I doubt that, even if disclosed, the American public would be infuriated to know he was detained for interogation.

[clairobscur]

As far as the "abduction" raid in Abbottabad goes, how do you suppose it differs from the official account(according to this piece in the New Yorker (http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/08/08/110808fa_fact_schmidle?currentPage=all))?



Thanks for the link.





There were women in the house (and at least one in the same room when bin Laden was killed) who were not taken into custody, but rather turned over to Pakistan after being interrogated for example.

Specifically, if there's a chance that Osama's wife Amal saw anything that does not line up with the official account, why was she shot in the calf instead of the head a half dozen times?

Didn't Osama's wife watch him die?

Not everyone in the compound was killed or taken. The SEALs left behind a number of women and children. .


The presence of civilian (and relatives of OBL to boot) witnesses of the raid was the part I had missed. Thanks.

[t-bonham@scc.net]

Not everyone in the compound was killed or taken. The SEALs left behind a number of women and children.Yes, that was a clear violation of God's instructions in Psalm 137:9 -- "Happy shall he be, that takes and dashes your little ones against the stones."

[Mijin]

The thing is, I almost want to believe a conspiracy on this because there was no sense of closure. It was such an anti-climax for him to be the world's most wanted man for ten years, heck the very symbol of terrorism, and then one day be dead and the body is in the sea somewhere.

It would be like a mission to Mars but announcing it for the first time the day after the astronauts have returned to earth. And saying there's no photos / video for security reasons.

At the least there should have been a video of a 30 minute fist fight between him and obama :cool:

[Monty]

I think it's great that the scum was dropped into the ocean. I live in a coastal city and it's less than a ten-minute drive for me to get to a pier. At least once a week, I go to the seaside and hock a loogie into the ocean.

Also, CTers are WONJs. There's no reasoning with them.

[newcomer]

But wait, let's compare. Your story is about some people forging some documents and, with the help of a state-controlled media, convincing a group of people whose own ethnic self-perceptions ride on the forgeries being real, that the forgeries were real. Doesn't sound so impressive stated that way, right? Then add on that the rest of the world didn't believe it, even though all the people who would know better were dead. Contrast that with the Bin Laden case, where the relevant media are not state-controlled, the rest of the world (including supporters of Bin Laden) do believe the story, and people who would know better are still alive. Not really a comparable case, right? I wasn't really comparing to the OP. My thoughts on OP are already up there.

The point I was trying to make is that in the case from Balkans there was a superior and ultimate power (ICTY) that was able and willing to subject local conspiracy to tedious and time consuming due diligence. The key is -- even though there were people who were not convinced and who did raise an issue -- that the conspiracy met the authority of ICTY enforced by NATO that elevated it to a due process that most people abide by.

To go off tangent here, but compare that to Iraq war conspiracy – it’s all clear, a large amount of people who were/are not convinced about WMD and large number of people who did/are raised/raising an issue yet no authority is available to allow it a due process and ultimately try Bush Jr., Cheney and others for a conspiracy to mislead US to a war that cost hundreds thousands of lives both Iraqis and US soldiers. I mean, come on, Iraq as a state sponsor of 9/11 was mentioned the next day, on 9/12.

Such an authority is/was missing for decades and in the absence of such an authority lots of things can occur because it becomes very easy to recruit people for whatever one wants to do.

[Gyrate]

When you tell them that they were made up with the goal of misrepresenting the reality they start cracking jokes like the one you just did.They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright Brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.The fact that some conspiracies do exist and have existed does not mean that all conspiracy theories are equally plausible, legitimate or true. Each must be judged on its own merits.

[newcomer]

The fact that some conspiracies do exist and have existed does not mean that all conspiracy theories are equally plausible, legitimate or true. Each must be judged on its own merits. While I certainly appreciate your contribution to the body of satirical references to a debate, I’d point out that sometimes it may be misplaced. I thought my point is crystal clear and you even, in the preaching part of your post, hinted it.

Just so we’re on the same page, what authority will be the judge of the merits?

Do you consider yourself an authority that can summon and investigate the inner workings of secret departments of Al-Q, domestic or foreign Governments? And I’m the one called pretentious.

[Gyrate]

While I certainly appreciate your contribution to the body of satirical references to a debate, I’d point out that sometimes it may be misplaced. I thought my point is crystal clear and you even, in the preaching part of your post, hinted it.

Just so we’re on the same page, what authority will be the judge of the merits?I'd settle for William of Ockham.

[newcomer]

I'd settle for William of Ockham. I'm not sure he would apply. Rather, it is a situation where Kurt Gödel would be needed. To paraphrase, in order to show that the paradigm is consistent you cannot use the assumptions of the said paradigm.

That's to avoid something from "Yes, Minister": "When telling a story don't go with a story that anyone can prove. Rather, go with a story where nobody can prove its false".

I hope it's clear we're talking about two radically different philosophical approaches.

[Vinyl Turnip]

Do you consider yourself an authority that can summon and investigate the inner workings of secret departments of Al-Q, domestic or foreign Governments?

So the default position is to assume a conspiracy; the complete lack of evidence for said conspiracy does not disprove its existence, but only means we're unable to penetrate the deepest, most shadowy inner core. (But we're pretty sure it's in there, and they're doing diabolical things.)

Radically different philosophical approaches, indeed.

[newcomer]

So the default position is to assume a conspiracy; the complete lack of evidence for said conspiracy does not disprove its existence, but only means we're unable to penetrate the deepest, most shadowy inner core. (But we're pretty sure it's in there, and they're doing diabolical things.)

Radically different philosophical approaches, indeed. No.

Default is that you don't accept what's being served by default.

For example, Bush and Cheney did not have to be sworn in for the testimony regarding investigation about largest terrorist attack in US history. Compare that to Bill Clinton who had to be sworn in the investigation about a blowjob.

I absolutely understand how you don’t see anything wrong with that. And, I can also see how it's all very amusing. But, you’re not convincing by any standard.

[Vinyl Turnip]

At least we have that in common.

[SciFiSam]

You're not a conspiracy theorist for having the initial notion.

I've vaguely considered it too, but never really looked into the circumstances of his death in detail. There are non-evil reasons for keeping OBL alive or pretending you got him and I pretty much expect politicians to lie whenever it's convenient to do so. OBL's death was pretty secretive - for good reasons, I'm sure, but that still means it was secretive.

I don't think the OP deserves the ire he/she's getting in this thread. The OP talked about doubts, asked a question and said OBL 'might' not have been killed. Hardly moon-landing denier level.

You would be if you one of you discounted the kinds of evidence outlined above and still saw it as a probable scenario.

Otara

Yup. I've now read a couple of the links, and that, coupled with what you guys have said and what I knew before, make me as certain as can be that he really is dead.

[Vinyl Turnip]

I don't think the OP deserves the ire he/she's getting in this thread.

Who has given the OP ire?

Personally, if there's any credible evidence to his being not-dead, I'd love to hear it. I haven't heard anything but a lot of what-ifs.

Not to say the idea is impossible. We now know that many aspects of initial reports of the raid were false; I was (and remain) skeptical of the "burial at sea" story. Don't have any evidence to prove it, just a suspicion that we'd have made that the official story even if we'd hung on to his remains.

Convincing the world (well, most of it, anyway) that he's dead when he's not, however, is a rather grander and more complicated endeavor and would require a level of manipulation and large-scale conspiracy I'm not prepared to assume exists until someone comes up with something to support the theory. "They tried it once in Serbia" ain't gonna cut it.

[SciFiSam]

Who has given the OP ire?

Personally, if there's any credible evidence to his being not-dead, I'd love to hear it. I haven't heard anything but a lot of what-ifs.

Not to say the idea is impossible. We now know that many aspects of initial reports of the raid were false; I was (and remain) skeptical of the "burial at sea" story. Don't have any evidence to prove it, just a suspicion that we'd have made that the official story even if we'd hung on to his remains.

Convincing the world (well, most of it, anyway) that he's dead when he's not, however, is a rather grander and more complicated endeavor and would require a level of manipulation and large-scale conspiracy I'm not prepared to assume exists until someone comes up with something to support the theory. "They tried it once in Serbia" ain't gonna cut it.

Nah, you're right, I was going mostly on tone, and that can be misinterpreted; only two people either insulted the OP or said they wished this was the Pit.

I'm not saying there's credible evidence, but TBH I think it's fair that some people are a little suspicious of a secretive death sentence carried out as part of a war that many people think was hinky to start with. Continuing with that notion after reading the evidence is a little daft, but it's not weird to wonder about it - it doesn't, as the OP asks, make you a conspiracy theorist.

[Monty]

I was (and remain) skeptical of the "burial at sea" story.

Oh, please. You must not be aware that there are over seven thousand people in a carrier strike group (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrier_Strike_Group).

[Vinyl Turnip]

Oh, please. You must not be aware that there are over seven thousand people in a carrier strike group (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrier_Strike_Group).

Oh, I don't doubt at all that there was a "ceremony" and that a bag said to contain OBL's remains was dumped into the ocean. And it probably did. On the other hand, if we kept the remains, there would be definite advantages (and relatively few risks, compared with faking his death) to claiming we buried him at sea.

[Kobal2]

Oh, I don't doubt at all that there was a "ceremony" and that a bag said to contain OBL's remains was dumped into the ocean. And it probably did. On the other hand, if we kept the remains, there would be definite advantages (and relatively few risks, compared with faking his death) to claiming we buried him at sea.

Wait, your pet theory is that he was killed in the raid, but the US secretly kept his body ?! WHY ? What could possibly be the justification for such a thing ? Letting Obama defile his purulent corpse as vindication over 9/11, mount his head in SEAL Team 6's break room, what ?

[Boyo Jim]

I think the case to compare when considering a conspiracy theory is NOT the "Iraq and WMD" claims (though I'm still amazed the US didn't smuggle some in as the war was ending in order to "discover" it and call in the press).

I think the comparative cases are the death of Pat Tillman, and the capture and subsequent rescue of Jessica Lynch. In both cases senior elements of the military made up bullshit cover stories out of whole cloth and got the Pentagon and/or the White House repeating the bullshit until the truth eventually came out. I'm not sure if the ever thoroughly figured out who knew the truth and when they knew it, and compared that to the timeline of what was announced to the public.

I don't believe this is the case with OBL, but I don't rule out the possibility that the US government, or elements of it, will tell ginormous lies (and ones not even very difficult to disprove) under the 'right' conditions. Except I don't know what the 'right' conditions are.

My best WAG as to how shit like this happens is the some mid-level clown is doing CYA, or maybe decides the country needs a "morale building" story, reports it up the chain of command, and it gets faithfully repeated until too many discrepancies appear,

It's always a fuckin' colonel! :p

[newcomer]

At least we have that in common. I’m afraid that the point I’m trying to make is being either misunderstood or there’s some tendency to lump everything and everybody in the same boat of “conspiracies” and deal with it as a collective asylum rather than evaluating each concept individually (and quite understandable given the fact that simply there’s so much to go around).

So, onto the example…

“I shall give a propaganda reason for starting the war; whether it is plausible or not. The victor will not be asked whether he told the truth” said Adolf Hitler to his generals prior to invasion of Poland in 1939.

Among many incidents with Poland, Gleiwitz incident was the straw that broke the camel’s back and created clear path for Germany to invade and start WW2. At the time, many foreign observers including US were not keen to accept it, as per Wiki: "(...) no neutral parties were allowed to investigate the incident in detail and the international public was sceptical of the German version of the incident."

So, incident happened, Germany went on to flat line not only Poland but many other countries and many, many human lives in the process. Many people forgot about the incident. It was long ago and in the big scheme of things did not mean much.

However, war ended differently than Hitler expected and Germany as a loser was asked for the truth. And the truth did come out about the Gleiwitz incident in 1945/46 at Nuremberg trials when it was shown to be a meticulously managed and executed by Abwehr special operation teams to create public awareness, approval and conditions for invasion of Poland.

The moral of the story is – it was done more than 50 years ago, conspirators were hard core Nazis who did not see anything wrong with it, they paid attention to details even though you’d think there was no need for it, it was used to the fullest for the propaganda purposes but -- unfortunately for Nazis, they did not come out as victors so even though the truth was hidden for as long as they were holding on, it all came out because there was an authority above them that was able to perform due diligence and look into everything.

Otherwise, it would stay on the history books forever as a fact.

[MarcusF]

<snip>
Otherwise, it would stay on the history books forever as a fact.Not necessarily. Even if Germany had won the war there is every possibility this would have come out. As you say, there was suspicion at the time and I as I understand it there was little attempt to hide the truth internally. It just had to be plausible to the public. Once Germany has won there is even less incentive to go back and remove all traces. Roll round 1993 - 50 years after the victorius war - Hitler is long dead and memoirs are published, archives are mined and revisionist history books are written.

[newcomer]

and I as I understand it there was little attempt to hide the truth internally Your analysis lacks any serious attempt at offering a differing view. It's a low-key subjective characterization that appeals to people who'd rather not think nor seek answers.

Still, to keep it interesting, I'd be curious to see what your “understanding” is based on.

Because I have a totally different "understanding" on the same topic (“little attempt to hide the truth internally”) based on
http://ww2today.com/the-gleiwitz-incident-and-the-first-man-to-die-in-world-war-ii

[t-bonham@scc.net]

“I shall give a propaganda reason for starting the war; whether it is plausible or not. The victor will not be asked whether he told the truth” said Adolf Hitler to his generals prior to invasion of Poland in 1939.Do you have a cite for that quote?

Because it seems to me that it is not something Hitler was likely to have said at that time. He believed that attacking Poland would NOT start a war (with England & France), but that they would back down like in Czechoslovakia, just making diplomatic protests, etc. I have seen other material indicating that he thought a war with them wouldn't come until several years later, in the 1940's, and that German war production (Naval ship buildup, airplane construction, etc.) was planned expecting a few more years before a full scale war.

Why would he have talked about "starting the war" when he didn't expect this to start one?

[newcomer]

Do you have a cite for that quote?

It's both on relevant Wiki page and link provided in the post right above yours.

[Oliveritaly]

It's always a fuckin' colonel! :p

Man Boyo, I've done public affairs for the U.S. Military for almost 25 years now. That line is so dead on target. I swear I could right a book.