The widows and children of Osama Bin Laden

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Sat Apr 21, 2012 3:56 pm

spot;1391743 wrote: I'm interested in why you think "at once" changes the nature of death. In the Troubles in Northern Ireland - "Troubles" means a specific date range of (without looking it up) 1970 to 1998 - more people were deliberately killed than died on 9/11.

Both events - the Troubles and 9/11 - were criminal acts.

The UK and Ireland brought the Troubles to an end by two means: treating the paramilitary killings as crimes, and ending the reasons for which the paramilitaries were fighting by a political process.

America hasn't even started to take either of those steps, all it's done is engaged in two completely pointless wars which has destroyed its good name in the eyes of a large fraction of humanity and radicalized generations of Muslims across the world. Both of those outcomes were the primary objective of Osama bin Laden. Against all the odds, and solely as a result of the crass stupidity of your successive governments, he achieved what he set out to do. America handed him a victory he could never have achieved on his own.

When you wage war on an individual or people ..ie "War on terror etc ..it no longer becomes a crminal act..it's a calateral Damage thing.

The IRA (in all it's forms) were at War with England..... They are not criminals they are soldiers. Past and present. You do not erect memorials to Criminals you erect them for soldiers. And just because a couple of pompous countries that have focussed on ruining the world says they're criminals doesn't it make it so . Interesting No one ever declared War on vietnam (it wa s apolice action) but we all call it a war ...criminal act maybe? Why didn't Britain get involved.?

Post by **spot** » Sat Apr 21, 2012 3:58 pm

AnneBoleyn;1391838 wrote: In the decade prior to 9/11 NORAD was involved in ONE intercept.I find that quite credible. It's called a weasel fact. The Air National Guard - those chaps with the whizzbang jet fighters - was involved in many more Mainland US interceptions than that. If you'd like examples posting I'll happily post examples.

Post by **spot** » Sat Apr 21, 2012 4:00 pm

fuzzywuzzy;1391841 wrote: The IRA (in all it's forms) were at War with England.....
Which country did they govern? Which country's orders did they obey?

The word you're looking for is "paramilitary", I suggest you look it up.

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Sat Apr 21, 2012 4:05 pm

The UK and Ireland brought the Troubles to an end by two means: treating the paramilitary killings as crimes, and ending the reasons for which the paramilitaries were fighting by a political process.

You just contradicted yourself. And tell me something to all intents and purposes were all criminals of the queen given the (or are given in the present day ) the same treatment as the irish in prison? Teh five steps? the isolation? Internment on no charge? HHhmmmmm

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Sat Apr 21, 2012 4:07 pm

spot;1391843 wrote: Which country did they govern? Which country's orders did they obey?

The word you're looking for is "paramilitary", I suggest you look it up.

The troubles have gone on for ceturies ..but you have a scewed and different view being the licker of your highnesses shoes.

Post by **spot** » Sat Apr 21, 2012 4:18 pm

fuzzywuzzy;1391846 wrote: The troubles have gone on for ceturies ..but you have a scewed and different view being the licker of your highnesses shoes.

All I'm doing is discussing the terminology of international law as it's existed since the 18th century.

Post by **spot** » Sat Apr 21, 2012 4:23 pm

fuzzywuzzy;1391844 wrote: You just contradicted yourself. And tell me something to all intents and purposes were all criminals of the queen given the (or are given in the present day ) the same treatment as the irish in prison?

By all means find a court which has the jurisdiction to try them and a statute book against which they've offended. Without those two things you're using the word "criminal" as propaganda. It has a legal meaning which you're refusing to recognize, it means we have no common vocabulary to discuss the subject with. Some members of the armed forces broke the law and were prosecuted, they were criminals. You're applying the word to the armed forces as a whole. It's your choice to use language that way, but it makes your comments meaningless.

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Sat Apr 21, 2012 4:46 pm

They are meaningful to way too many people . and I'm talking about the average person who goes to prison, are they treated as same in prison as any member of the IRA? Are they arrested held and charged as the IRA were and innocent persons of Eire? So if what they have accomplished are just criminal acts then why were they treated differently?

Some members of the armed forces? Some? All should have been . Not one, Ever, had jurisdiction for what they did .

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:15 am

spot;1391842 wrote: I find that quite credible. It's called a weasel fact. The Air National Guard - those chaps with the whizzbang jet fighters - was involved in many more Mainland US interceptions than that. If you'd like examples posting I'll happily post examples.
Please do. Can't resist your happiness.

Post by **spot** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:30 am

AnneBoleyn;1391884 wrote: Please do. Can't resist your happiness.

Just browsing around then, here's how it works:The Associated Press State & Local Wire February 10, 2000 "Pilots tell of trailing Payne Stewart's jet"

Military pilots who shadowed golfer Payne Stewart's jet say it was eerie to watch it fly on its own and then crash into a pasture near Mina. Pilots from several Air National Guard units followed the Lear jet on a cross-country flight after the two pilots and four passengers became incapacitated. It ran out of fuel and crashed Oct. 25 in a field near Mina.

"I really don't remember a lot going through my mind, other than I just hoped it doesn't crash in a populated area or hit a farm house," Maj. Kent Olson of the North Dakota Air National Guard told KELO Television. The jet crashed four hours after it left Orlando, Fla., on a flight to Texas, flying 1,400 miles apparently on autopilot before it ran out of fuel. Government officials suspect the jet lost cabin pressure soon after taking off, causing everyone on board to die or lose consciousness from lack of oxygen.

F-16 fighter jets training at Tyndall Air Force Base in Florida were sent up to check on the Lear jet on the first sign of possible trouble. As the jet flew northward, Air Guard pilots from Oklahoma and North Dakota became involved.

"We took a quick glance inside and really couldn't see much, the windows were frosted over," said Olson. "After my second pass I watched it flame out, go out of control and spiral down. It was like it wasn't really happening, but of course it was," he said.

Maj. Shawn Higgins, an F-16 pilot for the Duluth, Minn., Air National Guard who was training at Tyndall that day, was the first pilot to trail the jet. "We were scheduled for a morning training sortie and it happened that we got the scramble order as we're taking off for that sortie, so we got diverted off that and started bending north and started talking to the controllers to go intercept that aircraft," Higgins said. He had no idea who was on board, only that everyone apparently was incapacitated.

"Obviously you get a real sick feeling in your stomach when you see something like that...but that's our business and I guess you're going to see something like that eventually," Higgins said.

Note the "we got the scramble order"? And the "sent up to check on the Lear jet on the first sign of possible trouble"?

Would you like another?

theia · Post by **theia** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:37 am

I would, spot...I found that one last night but had a problem finding the rest

Post by **spot** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:51 am

While I can see the material, these are relevant too.The Associated Press State & Local Wire January 30, 2000 "Second of a 2-part series; General in charge of air defense worries about terrorism from the sky"

Air defense sectors at Tyndall, Rome, N.Y., and McChord Air Force Base, Wash., monitor ground radar shared with the Federal Aviation Administration throughout their regions. Airborne radar on balloons provides some, but not complete, low-altitude coverage to spot planes flying under the net cast by the ground radar.

Air Guard F-16 Fighting Falcons and F-15 Eagles can be airborne in minutes, but they are stretched thin.

And this is the timeline for the scramble:Aviation Week & Space Technology November 1, 1999 "Learjet 'Mystery Flight' Leaves Few Clues for Investigators"

The mishap aircraft left Orlando, Fla., at approximately 9:19 a.m. EDT on a planned 2-hr. flight to Dallas Love Field, carrying about 4.75 hr. of fuel. As the aircraft climbed through 37,000 ft. at 9:44 a.m., FAA controllers ''lost contact with the flight'' northwest of Gainesville, Fla., according to the NTSB. The Learjet crew had been cleared to 39,000 ft. A planned heading change was not executed, and the aircraft continued on a northwesterly course, still climbing.

Around 10 a.m. EDT, FAA officials contacted the NORAD Region Headquarters at Tyndall AFB, Fla., and requested an emergency escort for the nonresponsive Learjet. Armed F-16 fighters sitting air-defense alert at Tyndall were scrambled and reported airborne by 10:10. However, because they were closer to the errant Learjet's flight path, an F-16 and A-10 from Eglin AFB, Fla., were diverted to intercept the Learjet and the Tyndall fighters were released.

Planes in the air within 26 minutes of the course deflection.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:51 am

spot;1391888 wrote: Just browsing around then, here's how it works:The Associated Press State & Local Wire February 10, 2000 "Pilots tell of trailing Payne Stewart's jet"

Military pilots who shadowed golfer Payne Stewart's jet say it was eerie to watch it fly on its own and then crash into a pasture near Mina. Pilots from several Air National Guard units followed the Lear jet on a cross-country flight after the two pilots and four passengers became incapacitated. It ran out of fuel and crashed Oct. 25 in a field near Mina.

"I really don't remember a lot going through my mind, other than I just hoped it doesn't crash in a populated area or hit a farm house," Maj. Kent Olson of the North Dakota Air National Guard told KELO Television. The jet crashed four hours after it left Orlando, Fla., on a flight to Texas, flying 1,400 miles apparently on autopilot before it ran out of fuel. Government officials suspect the jet lost cabin pressure soon after taking off, causing everyone on board to die or lose consciousness from lack of oxygen.

F-16 fighter jets training at Tyndall Air Force Base in Florida were sent up to check on the Lear jet on the first sign of possible trouble. As the jet flew northward, Air Guard pilots from Oklahoma and North Dakota became involved.

"We took a quick glance inside and really couldn't see much, the windows were frosted over," said Olson. "After my second pass I watched it flame out, go out of control and spiral down. It was like it wasn't really happening, but of course it was," he said.

Maj. Shawn Higgins, an F-16 pilot for the Duluth, Minn., Air National Guard who was training at Tyndall that day, was the first pilot to trail the jet. "We were scheduled for a morning training sortie and it happened that we got the scramble order as we're taking off for that sortie, so we got diverted off that and started bending north and started talking to the controllers to go intercept that aircraft," Higgins said. He had no idea who was on board, only that everyone apparently was incapacitated.

"Obviously you get a real sick feeling in your stomach when you see something like that...but that's our business and I guess you're going to see something like that eventually," Higgins said.

Note the "we got the scramble order"? And the "sent up to check on the Lear jet on the first sign of possible trouble"?

Would you like another?

This Is a ridiculous comparison to make to the 9/11 situation.

The example you have given was a private Jet that only had 6 people on board and was In danger of crashing Into a populated area.

Now show us an example where 4 passenger planes were hi-jacked with hundreds and hundreds of passengers Including children were on bard.

Post by **spot** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 9:13 am

I'm downstairs helping Geoffrey most of this afternoon but I'll keep skimming material. Once I've got the scale of the Air National Guard and the extent to which it was reduced by 2001 I'll focus on hijacks and distressed planes over the mainland USA.

The Associated Press May 5, 1994 "GAO Doubts Usefulness of 24-Hour Air Interceptors"

To this day, pilots at remote bases in Alaska, North Dakota and other locations are on 24-hour alert, ready to jump aboard F-15 and F-16 fighters for air-intercept missions. The force is made up of 180 fighters manned by the Air National Guard.

Pentagon officials concede that there is little chance fighters will need to meet Russian bombers heading over the North Pole for the United States. But the Clinton administration wants to keep most of the fighters and air-defense units going on new missions such as drug interdiction and anti-terrorism.

The GAO says shutting down the air intercept force would save $ 370 million a year. Other air units could take over the greatly reduced air defense mission, the GAO argues. The Clinton administration plan of more modest reductions would save $ 37 million annually.

Over the past four years each of the nation's 24 air defense bases averaged 15 "scrambles" a year. The intercept missions included escorting civil aircraft from communist countries, assisting aircraft in distress, counterdrug operations and tracking hijacked aircraft.

Post by **spot** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 9:17 am

oscar;1391892 wrote: This Is a ridiculous comparison to make to the 9/11 situation.

The example you have given was a private Jet that only had 6 people on board and was In danger of crashing Into a populated area.

Now show us an example where 4 passenger planes were hi-jacked with hundreds and hundreds of passengers Including children were on bard.

You know perfectly well there's no such example. What I'm doing is finding the time between course diversion and scrambling the Air National Guard, since what's missing on 9/11 is the timely scrambling the Air National Guard for any one of the divergent planes. Either we keep a tight focus or we're going in circles. If the planes weren't scrambled in the same timeframe as previous occasions then something was wrong. The first question to answer is whether the planes were scrambled in the same timeframe as previous occasions, hence this search.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 9:31 am

spot;1391895 wrote: You know perfectly well there's no such example. What I'm doing is finding the time between course diversion and scrambling the Air National Guard, since what's missing on 9/11 is the scrambling the Air National Guard for any one of the divergent planes. Either we keep a tight focus or we're going in circles. If the planes weren't scrambled in the same timeframe as previous occasions then something was wrong. The first question to answer is whether the planes were scrambled in the same timeframe as previous occasions, hence this search.

Actually, It seems to be you that's missing the point here.

You can post as many Interceptions since ww2 for all It matters. There has never been such an unprecedented event as 4 passenger planes being hi-jacked all at the same time with hundreds and hundreds of Innocent passengers on board.

As I understand It, It was acknowledged early on that the planes had been hi-jacked but their mission to fly Into buildings was not. It was widely considered at the time that all 4 planes would eventually land where negotiations for the safety of the passengers could begin, hence, the lack of Interception.

What would you prefer Spot.... all 4 passenger planes shot down before the outcome was clear ?

Post by **spot** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 9:59 am

oscar;1391897 wrote: You can post as many Interceptions since ww2 for all It matters. There has never been such an unprecedented event as 4 passenger planes being hi-jacked all at the same time with hundreds and hundreds of Innocent passengers on board.Here's the logic that's escaped you. At the moment they weren't routinely scrambling, the number of the hijackings and the consequences of the hijackings was (if there was no stand-down order) unknown, it was in the future, it was not a part of the decision making process, it could have no effect on the process of getting response aircraft into the air. What happens after that is a different matter but actually getting the aircraft off the tarmac isn't, and the planes didn't get off the tarmac.

Perhaps you'd like to suggest why the subsequently-known fact that there were four planes or that they had "hundreds and hundreds of Innocent passengers on board" prevented the scrambling of interceptors, when that subsequently-known fact wasn't (if there was no stand-down order) available to the people responsible for ordering the planes into the sky.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 10:06 am

oscar;1391897 wrote: Actually, It seems to be you that's missing the point here.

You can post as many Interceptions since ww2 for all It matters. There has never been such an unprecedented event as 4 passenger planes being hi-jacked all at the same time with hundreds and hundreds of Innocent passengers on board.

As I understand It, It was acknowledged early on that the planes had been hi-jacked but their mission to fly Into buildings was not. It was widely considered at the time that all 4 planes would eventually land where negotiations for the safety of the passengers could begin, hence, the lack of Interception.

What would you prefer Spot.... all 4 passenger planes shot down before the outcome was clear ?Oddly enough, part of this post is relevant and contains an actual point. Too bad it also includes the personal bs.

It could be that interceptor planes were not employed in an attempt to prevent an escalation of the situation. Even though it's difficult to believe Bush/Cheney could think in terms of deescalating any matter, it remains a possibility.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 10:13 am

Who was at the helm of gov't? Nobody? Bush, the cowardly asinine Bush, was reading some goat stories to a kindergarten. Must have been Cheney in charge. Bush had no idea what was happening, that arrogant son of a.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 10:14 am

AnneBoleyn;1391900 wrote: Who was at the helm of gov't? Nobody? Bush, the cowardly asinine Bush, was reading some goat stories to a kindergarten. Must have been Cheney in charge. Bush had no idea what was happening, that arrogant son of a.It could be that it was hijacking protocol.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 10:17 am

Ahso!;1391901 wrote: It could be that it was hijacking protocol.
Protocol for the President, that he not take charge?

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 10:21 am

AnneBoleyn;1391902 wrote: Protocol for the President, that he not take charge?Protocol to not escalate hijacking situations. If I remember correctly, Bush was not informed of the situation until after the first plane hit WTC.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 10:21 am

spot;1391898 wrote: Here's the logic that's escaped you. At the moment they weren't routinely scrambling, the number of the hijackings and the consequences of the hijackings was (if there was no stand-down order) unknown, it was in the future, it was not a part of the decision making process, it could have no effect on the process of getting response aircraft into the air. What happens after that is a different matter but actually getting the aircraft off the tarmac isn't, and the planes didn't get off the tarmac.

Perhaps you'd like to suggest why the subsequently-known fact that there were four planes or that they had "hundreds and hundreds of Innocent passengers on board" prevented the scrambling of interceptors, when that subsequently-known fact wasn't (if there was no stand-down order) available to the people responsible for ordering the planes into the sky.

No, the logic has not escaped me Spot.

All 4 Aircraft had their transponders switched off or the pilots changed their codes when taking control. NORAD had difficulty tracking or even locating the aircraft although they admit they were able to briefly locate them In stronger radar area's.

As one example, they spotted flight 11 twenty miles north of Manhattan but this was In time sense, just 2 or 3 minutes before It crashed Into the North tower..... Far too late to Intercept or even shoot down.... an Impossible situation.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 10:30 am

I appreciate your replies oscar.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 11:06 am

Who's Geoffrey?

Post by **spot** » Sun Apr 22, 2012 5:08 pm

Ahso!;1391909 wrote: Who's Geoffrey?

One of my far-flung offspring. Another ran the London Marathon today, we were following his ankle transponder and split times.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:07 am

spot;1391968 wrote: One of my far-flung offspring. Another ran the London Marathon today, we were following his ankle transponder and split times.

I thought you once said that you did not have any sons ????

Anyway, back to topic.....

I'm curious as to what exactly you think should have been done given the circumstances Spot.

Bearing In mind, with transponders switched off and their codes changed, even when NORAD could briefly detect the 4 aircraft In strong radar airspace, the transponders switched off would mean that the unique signature to each aircraft would disappear. Even when for those fleeting moments they showed up on the radar, without a signature, NORAD would have no clue as to what the aircraft was nor what It was doing.

What would you have suggested then Spot?

Post by **spot** » Mon Apr 23, 2012 9:40 am

oscar;1392003 wrote: I thought you once said that you did not have any sons ????You show me and I'll apologize for lying. Or, if I was being sarcastic without reason, for being sarcastic without reason. I can well believe I might have said it while being sarcastic, you invite sarcasm like a magnet invites iron filings.

As for your "What would you have suggested then Spot", if you refuse to acknowledge that I've already addressed the questions then all I can do is ignore your repetition. I've said, planes show up on radar whether they've transponders identifying them or not, the transponders merely identify the displayed blips. I've said, filtering the display to show all blips with no transponder return or a false transponder return is trivially easy. What you're repeating are, presumably, NORAD's excuses to the 9/11 Commission.

I am, however, coming to the conclusion that all the "we intercept anything anytime anywhere" hype of the Air National Guard was pretty well untested for mainland US hijacks because there were remarkably few mainland US hijacks after the 70s. Ignoring planes coming into the US across a national border there are very few press reports of interceptions, just the "we do it" publicity material from the military. I'm going to have to find an alternate source for all those planes developing emergencies and diverting off their scheduled course, newspapers aren't adequate. I'll try the FAA incident report database.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Apr 23, 2012 3:08 pm

spot;1392040 wrote: You show me and I'll apologize for lying. Or, if I was being sarcastic without reason, for being sarcastic without reason. I can well believe I might have said it while being sarcastic, you invite sarcasm like a magnet invites iron filings.

As for your "What would you have suggested then Spot", if you refuse to acknowledge that I've already addressed the questions then all I can do is ignore your repetition. I've said, planes show up on radar whether they've transponders identifying them or not, the transponders merely identify the displayed blips. I've said, filtering the display to show all blips with no transponder return or a false transponder return is trivially easy. What you're repeating are, presumably, NORAD's excuses to the 9/11 Commission.

I am, however, coming to the conclusion that all the "we intercept anything anytime anywhere" hype of the Air National Guard was pretty well untested for mainland US hijacks because there were remarkably few mainland US hijacks after the 70s. Ignoring planes coming into the US across a national border there are very few press reports of interceptions, just the "we do it" publicity material from the military. I'm going to have to find an alternate source for all those planes developing emergencies and diverting off their scheduled course, newspapers aren't adequate. I
It's no big deal Spot. It was approx a year ago on a thread where you were posting about male yobs and how to deal with them. I asked you directly In a post weather you had a son and you posted, no, and something about your loins...maybe the title of the thread will come to me at some point and I'll find It. I was not accusing you of lying,

I'll be Interested If you find anything else re: Interceptions.

Post by **spot** » Thu May 03, 2012 2:14 am

They arrived in Saudi Arabia six days ago, all of the family which had been in the compound. Whether free speech is an aspect of Saudi society, and whether if it is they choose to avail themselves, we'll wait and see.Pakistani authorities have tried to ignore the anniversary and erase all trace of bin Laden, who lived in the country from December 2001 until his death last May, according to testimony from his widow Amal Abdulfattah. She was deported to Saudi Arabia on Friday along with bin Laden's other two widows and 10 children.

Rallies in Pakistan pay tribute to bin Laden - Central & South Asia - Al Jazeera English

And a neat detailed summary of the current state of affairs they leave behind: http://www.thefrontierpost.com/article/159185/

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri May 04, 2012 11:06 am

spot;1392818 wrote: They arrived in Saudi Arabia six days ago, all of the family which had been in the compound. Whether free speech is an aspect of Saudi society, and whether if it is they choose to avail themselves, we'll wait and see.Pakistani authorities have tried to ignore the anniversary and erase all trace of bin Laden, who lived in the country from December 2001 until his death last May, according to testimony from his widow Amal Abdulfattah. She was deported to Saudi Arabia on Friday along with bin Laden's other two widows and 10 children.

Rallies in Pakistan pay tribute to bin Laden - Central & South Asia - Al Jazeera English

And a neat detailed summary of the current state of affairs they leave behind: End of chapter - Osama family deported to Saudi Arabia

I now have doubts as to weather we will hear from them. At least In France, they may have stood a chance at speaking out. As you say, we will have to wait and see.

Did anyone see the doco last night Into the last moments of Bin Laden ?

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Fri May 04, 2012 2:49 pm

Have you guys seen that they are saying one of the wives turned him in?

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri May 04, 2012 2:53 pm

flopstock;1392961 wrote: Have you guys seen that they are saying one of the wives turned him in?

Yes.... Here's a link for those who haven't:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/08/world ... wanted=all

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Fri May 04, 2012 3:08 pm

Bloody women

Post by **spot** » Fri May 04, 2012 3:50 pm

and are we familiar with the concept of Psych Ops, otherwise known as lying in order to disconcert a targeted opponent?

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Fri May 04, 2012 4:01 pm

spot;1392971 wrote: and are we familiar with the concept of Psych Ops, otherwise known as lying in order to disconcert a targeted opponent?

Wouldn't that be better in the reconstituted Monty Python sketch thread ?

katsung47 · Post by **katsung47** » Fri May 04, 2012 5:40 pm

oscar;1391742 wrote: You raise some very good points.... I read quite a bit of Bin Laden several years ago and many reported his death 10 years ago from kidney failure.....

The one thing I have to question In the killing of Bin Laden In Pakistan Is that the Seal apparently shot him In the head first based on 'Facial recognition'... Yet, when his body was taken from the building Into the courtyard. to ensure It was Bin Laden, we are told that a 6ft 2 Inch Seal lay down next to his body to check the fact BL was 6ft 4 Inch.... now, call me a cynic but surely, In a precise operation, someone must have had a better way of Identifying him..... Now we have the possibility that BL was not buried at sea In accordance with the Muslim Faith as we have been told, but In fact, his body was brought back to the USA.

Another ridicular action. To measure the height? Could it be more accurate by cut the hand like what they did on Che Guevara? Or took some blood as DNA? Or more effective, taking a picture. Most likely, it's another gimmick to fool the people.

Do you believe an US court executed a prisoner but couldn't gave any hard evidence such like corpse, picture. Then let out a pile of different stories. I wonder what those high ranking government officials had seen in situation room on that night? Do you think it was a top secret how Bin Laden was shot to death? It should be no other than a film. The strange thing is no media thought of to ask any of those officials what they had seen on TV. Because that, after all, was a soap opera to fool the people. They have seen nothing of Bin Laden. So no word could be given. And our elite Seal team 6, forgot to take any evidence but only lay down to measure the dead man's height.

Pentagon admits it has no photo evidence of Bin Laden's death Special

Elliott By Elliott Freeman

May 1, 2012 - yesterday in Politics

Pentagon officials recently disclosed to the Associated Press (AP) that they could not find any photo or video evidence to confirm that Al Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden was killed in the Navy Seal raid in Pakistan a year ago.

AP has submitted more than 20 requests for information surrounding the raid on Bin Laden’s Abbottabad compound to the U.S. Government under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

In response to the request for visual evidence of Bin Laden’s death, the Pentagon stated that it could not find any pictures or video footage of the raid itself or of Bin Laden’s dead body. It also told AP it could not locate any images of Bin Laden’s body that were taken on the U.S.S. Carl Vinson, the Navy aircraft carrier that reportedly lowered him into the sea after his death.

In addition, the Pentagon admitted that it could not find an autopsy report, death certificate or results of a DNA identification test for Bin Laden, in spite of claims made by President Obama and reported by CBC News that a DNA test was performed.

Read more: Pentagon admits it has no photo evidence of Bin Laden's death (Includes interview)

katsung47 · Post by **katsung47** » Fri May 04, 2012 5:48 pm

katsung47;1392989 wrote: Another ridicular action. To measure the height? Could it be more accurate by cut the hand like what they did on Che Guevara? Or took some blood as DNA? Or more effective, taking a picture. Most likely, it's another gimmick to fool the people.

Do you believe an US court executed a prisoner but couldn't gave any hard evidence such like corpse, picture. Then let out a pile of different stories. I wonder what those high ranking government officials had seen in situation room on that night? Do you think it was a top secret how Bin Laden was shot to death? It should be no other than a film. The strange thing is no media thought of to ask any of those officials what they had seen on TV. Because that, after all, was a soap opera to fool the people. They have seen nothing of Bin Laden. So no word could be given. And our elite Seal team 6, forgot to take any evidence but only lay down to measure the dead man's height.

Now there is a possibility that one of those officials to prove he had seen the dead Bin Laden film that night after I point out thier flaw.

katsung47 · Post by **katsung47** » Thu May 17, 2012 6:45 pm

The widows and children of Osama Bin Laden

Bin Laden's family was escorted off the US after 911. Any one with common sense should know that they were under surveillance if Bin Laden was on the list of most wanted. How could they live another ten years with Bin Laden?

FBI Knowingly Allowed Bin Laden To Personally Charter Flight After 9/11

Newly released documents prove agency let Osama's family go at his request without even questioning them

Prison Planet | June 21, 2007

Steve Watson

The FBI were aware that Osama Bin Laden may have chartered one of the flights that took Bin Laden family members out of the U.S. in the days after the 9/11 attacks, yet allowed the planes to depart without even questioning them, new Agency documents reveal.

.....

The documents state:

ON 9/19/01, A 727 PLANE LEFT LAX, RYAN FLT #441 TO ORLANDO, FL W/ETA (estimated time of arrival) OF 4-5PM. THE PLANE WAS CHARTERED EITHER BY THE SAUDI ARABIAN ROYAL FAMILY OR OSAMA BIN LADEN…THE LA FBI SEARCHED THE PLANE [REDACTED] LUGGAGE, OF WHICH NOTHING UNUSUAL WAS FOUND.

FBI Knowingly Allowed Bin Laden To Personally Charter Flight After 9/11

Post by **spot** » Fri May 18, 2012 1:30 am

That's the first post you've made here that's entirely non-controversial, I doubt whether anyone on this site refuses to recognize that it's entirely accurate.

Does anyone on this site refuse to recognize that it's entirely accurate?

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri May 18, 2012 8:47 am

katsung47;1392989 wrote: Another ridicular action. To measure the height? .

They sent 2 million dollars worth of helicoptors but couldn't afford a tape measure ?????????

katsung47 · Post by **katsung47** » Sat Jun 02, 2012 3:46 pm

oscar;1393915 wrote: They sent 2 million dollars worth of helicoptors but couldn't afford a tape measure ?????????

They have camera in everywhere, in banks, traffic lights, super markets, airports, cars, dronies, soldiers' helmets.... but missed in their most important raid on Bin Laden. I wonder what those officials were watching in situation room. Was it just another gimmick to fool people?

　

Pentagon admits it has no photo evidence of Bin Laden's death Special

　

Elliott By Elliott Freeman

May 1, 2012 - yesterday in Politics

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/3 ... z1tkGArVgD

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Jun 02, 2012 3:59 pm

katsung47;1395345 wrote: They have camera in everywhere, in banks, traffic lights, super markets, airports, cars, dronies, soldiers' helmets.... but missed in their most important raid on Bin Laden. I wonder what those officials were watching in situation room. Was it just another gimmick to fool people?

　

I'm glad you posted that picture. It was subject to discussion on a site and now I can't find the link ( Sorry ).

This Is the apparent moment that they watched Bin Laden killed via helmet cam on the Seal.

After this pic was released, apparently, the White House could account for every single person In that room and name them and their position. Apparently. no-one has a clue who the women with the dark hair Is right at the back of the room. They don't know who she Is, how she got In there and what she was doing there. Now If that's true, that's rather worrying.

katsung47 · Post by **katsung47** » Sat Jun 16, 2012 5:36 pm

oscar;1395347 wrote:

This Is the apparent moment that they watched Bin Laden killed via helmet cam on the Seal.

.

You have a flaw here. There are cameras everywhere in US to record your trace. A special task mission had none?

Pentagon admits it has no photo evidence of Bin Laden's death Special

　

Elliott By Elliott Freeman

May 1, 2012 - yesterday in Politics

　

Pentagon officials recently disclosed to the Associated Press (AP) that they could not find any photo or video evidence to confirm that Al Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden was killed in the Navy Seal raid in Pakistan a year ago.

AP has submitted more than 20 requests for information surrounding the raid on Bin Laden’s Abbottabad compound to the U.S. Government under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

In response to the request for visual evidence of Bin Laden’s death, the Pentagon stated that it could not find any pictures or video footage of the raid itself or of Bin Laden’s dead body. It also told AP it could not locate any images of Bin Laden’s body that were taken on the U.S.S. Carl Vinson, the Navy aircraft carrier that reportedly lowered him into the sea after his death.

In addition, the Pentagon admitted that it could not find an autopsy report, death certificate or results of a DNA identification test for Bin Laden, in spite of claims made by President Obama and reported by CBC News that a DNA test was performed.

Read more: Pentagon admits it has no photo evidence of Bin Laden's death (Includes interview)

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Sun Jun 17, 2012 9:12 am

The woman in the photo standing is Audrey Tomason, Director for Counterterrorism for the National Security Council.

Tufts Magazine / summer 2011

The moment that photo was shot they were not seeing bin laden killed, according to Hillary Clinton.

Maybe I just coughed: Hillary Clinton downplays expression of shock in Situation Room photo claiming it was 'Spring allergies'

Read more: Osama bin Laden dead: Hillary Clinton downplays situation room photo shock | Mail Online

katsung47 · Post by **katsung47** » Sun Jun 17, 2012 1:19 pm

AnneBoleyn;1396698 wrote: The woman in the photo standing is Audrey Tomason, Director for Counterterrorism for the National Security Council.

Tufts Magazine / summer 2011

The moment that photo was shot they were not seeing bin laden killed, according to Hillary Clinton.

Maybe I just coughed: Hillary Clinton downplays expression of shock in Situation Room photo claiming it was 'Spring allergies'

Read more: Osama bin Laden dead: Hillary Clinton downplays situation room photo shock | Mail Online

Maybe she still have a shame sense that she indirectly denied she had seen "kill Bin Laden" as the picture hinted.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Sun Jun 17, 2012 2:47 pm

Killing bin laden is nothing to be ashamed of.

Post by **spot** » Sun Jun 17, 2012 3:19 pm

AnneBoleyn;1396760 wrote: Killing bin laden is nothing to be ashamed of.

Oh but it is, it's a typical defining act of a rogue nation with too much power. Arresting him and bringing him to trial complete with evidence, that would be something to take pride in. Sneak assassination by overwhelming force is a grotesque insincere parody of justice. I didn't trust your government when it claimed it had an unanswerable case against him, I felt too much fly-the-flag propaganda had been spun over the years to take it all as truth. A civil trial would have been an honourable demonstration of integrity. The government-backed assassination lacked both.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 5:01 am

AnneBoleyn;1396760 wrote: Killing bin laden is nothing to be ashamed of.

It does pose the question of how many deaths were avoided by killing him. Had he have been captured, It Is not an over-active Imagination to guess that UN and Red Cross workers around the globe would have been In grave danger from radicals taking hostages In return for BL's release.

Post by **spot** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 5:23 am

Though, of course, martyring him guaranteed that millions will still be treating Bin Laden Day a hundred years from now as a celebration of his life and works. Bin Laden Day as a celebration of his life and works already exists in those parts of the world, I might add. In Islamic terms, nothing so became the man as the manner of his departure. It was a ridiculous own goal on the part of whoever decided to do it.