Osama Bin Laden Dead!

[zubi]

Bullshit.

If he was, why doesn't he just release a video? Then all of the world can see America lied and no-one would ever trust them again.

Because he's sipping tea with obama in the white house and reminiscing about the gool ol days of two and a half men

[zubi]

[Ashley]

Why don't they just show the pictures? The Saddam hanging was live on the net at the time possibly tv.

Also the Americans have come out saying there wasn't any live footage of the event? Few days ago they said there was......................................

[Leicester_Loyal]

I admit they keep changing the story, but releasing pictures will just add fuel to the fire.

And I read in yesterdays metro that we aren't living in a caveman era, so Osama should have had a proper burial.

Are these people ****ing deluded? Yeah, give the man a proper burial, he deserves one, killed a few thousand people and then give him a shrine so every other nutter in the world can go there and pay their respects. **** that, hes dead in the sea, hopefully hes been eaten by a shark, thats all he deserves, scum of the highest order. All we need now is more of his family and his allies to be killed.

[Ashley]

I admit they keep changing the story, but releasing pictures will just add fuel to the fire.

And I read in yesterdays metro that we aren't living in a caveman era, so Osama should have had a proper burial.

Are these people ****ing deluded? Yeah, give the man a proper burial, he deserves one, killed a few thousand people and then give him a shrine so every other nutter in the world can go there and pay their respects. **** that, hes dead in the sea, hopefully hes been eaten by a shark, thats all he deserves, scum of the highest order. All we need now is more of his family and his allies to be killed.

On the news it said they could have burried him however because the body might be dug up after burial the americans decided to put him in the sea. All to do with muslim burials and being burried/disposed off 24 hours after you have died.

[Leicester_Loyal]

Yep, so they went with the Muslim religion there, yet people still moan. If they did it a different way, people would have said it wasn't right because they didn't do it the proper "Muslim" way.

[Fosse Boy]

Yep, so they went with the Muslim religion there, yet people still moan. If they did it a different way, people would have said it wasn't right because they didn't do it the proper "Muslim" way.

Well technically they didn't. When a Muslim is buried they have to be facing Mecca. Bit difficult to do that in the sea.

[zubi]

I admit they keep changing the story, but releasing pictures will just add fuel to the fire.

And I read in yesterdays metro that we aren't living in a caveman era, so Osama should have had a proper burial.

Are these people ****ing deluded? Yeah, give the man a proper burial, he deserves one, killed a few thousand people and then give him a shrine so every other nutter in the world can go there and pay their respects. **** that, hes dead in the sea, hopefully hes been eaten by a shark, thats all he deserves, scum of the highest order. All we need now is more of his family and his allies to be killed.

I understand where you're coming from, but do you think George Bush deserves a proper burial when he dies? After all he was the one who ordered the invasions in Iraq and Afghanistan which have costs hundreds of thousands of innocent lives? And hundreds of lives of British and American soldiers.

[zubi]

Well technically they didn't. When a Muslim is buried they have to be facing Mecca. Bit difficult to do that in the sea.

Just to clarify, the only time a muslim can be buried at sea is if they died whilst on voyage on the sea. Otherwise a proper burial must take place.

[Leicester_Loyal]

They did it within 24 hours, thats all he deserves in my opinion. I'm glad he hasn't got a proper grave.

As for the George Bush thing, I don't really know, I hate the fact that this war could potentially be over resources, but Pakistan terrorists had been passing through Afghanistan and gaining money from their resources as well, so the war still may have been the best thing.

[Finnegan]

What I don't quite understand is why people think a controlled demolition is proof that Jihadi terrorists didn't hijack and fly planes into the WTC?

Where is the conspiracy theory saying "well, they had a choice between letting them fall and risking X more lives or bringing them down with a controlled collapse and simply sacrificing the people inside. It's cold but it was a contingency plan, but they'll never admit to sacrificing that many lives."

No it's always "THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT MURDERED THEIR OWN PEOPLE FOR CONTROL YO!"

[Zingari]

What I don't quite understand is why people think a controlled demolition is proof that Jihadi terrorists didn't hijack and fly planes into the WTC?

Where is the conspiracy theory saying "well, they had a choice between letting them fall and risking X more lives or bringing them down with a controlled collapse and simply sacrificing the people inside. It's cold but it was a contingency plan, but they'll never admit to sacrificing that many lives."

No it's always "THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT MURDERED THEIR OWN PEOPLE FOR CONTROL YO!"

are you being serious ?

if it was a controlled demolition then it means its almost certainly an inside job that had been planned by agencies within the higher level of government ,

and if the demolition was planned by them , then why not the hijacking ? surely that would be the easy bit .

[Finnegan]

are you being serious ?

if it was a controlled demolition then it means its almost certainly an inside job that had been planned by agencies within the higher level of government ,

and if the demolition was planned by them , then why not the hijacking ? surely that would be the easy bit .

Because having a contingency plan to bring down the world's tallest building safely in the event of it being structurally unstable isn't as ridiculously unbelievable as "the American government bombed their own country."

Believing that the building is going to collapse and causing the deaths of the people left in it by bringing it down safely is a hugely morally grey action. It's something no government would ever want to publicly admit to.

But organizing the biggest terrorist event in history, targeting your own people with it and then intentionally building mass hysteria in the aftermath? That's not morally grey, it'd have to be the work of the biggest mass-organized group of sociopaths in history. It's a ridiculous notion and it's dependent on a fictional, fairy-tale-esque belief of "good" and "evil" people. The world just doesn't work like that.

People, on a base and psychological level, just don't work like that.

[Zingari]

Because having a contingency plan to bring down the world's tallest building safely in the event of it being structurally unstable isn't as ridiculously unbelievable as "the American government bombed their own country."

Believing that the building is going to collapse and causing the deaths of the people left in it by bringing it down safely is a hugely morally grey action. It's something no government would ever want to publicly admit to.

But organizing the biggest terrorist event in history, targeting your own people with it and then intentionally building mass hysteria in the aftermath? That's not morally grey, it'd have to be the work of a the biggest mass-organized group of sociopaths in history. It's a ridiculous notion and it's dependent on a fictional, fairy-tale-esque belief of "good" and "evil" people. The world just doesn't work like that.

People, on a base and psychological level, just don't work like that.

what ? i'm not with you

Are you saying that the government did actually bring down the building using a controlled explosion , but have not told anyone about it ?

And if they did this then the conspiracy theorists have been right all along that the planes and subsequent fires did not cause the collapse. aren't they ?

[Finnegan]

what ? i'm not with you

are you saying that the government did actually bring down the building using a controlled explosion , but have not told anyone about it ?

and if they did this , why not tell us now ?

.. what is not to understand? I'm not speaking French.

No, I'm not saying that that is what happened. I'm not even saying there WERE controlled explosions. I am saying if there were then that is one possible explanation and that, to me, it seems far more believable than George Bush and his administration staging the entire event from start to finish.

And assuming it did happen, what contemporary government would own up to it?

[marko]

.. what is not to understand? I'm not speaking French.

No, I'm not saying that that is what happened. I'm not even saying there WERE controlled explosions. I am saying if there were then that is one possible explanation and that, to me, it seems far more believable than George Bush and his administration staging the entire event from start to finish.

And assuming it did happen, what contemporary government would own up to it?

Especially when you consider what an inept regime it was as well.

[Finnegan]

Especially when you consider what an inept regime it was as well.

Images of George Bush throwing firecracker laden Airfix at Trump Tower.

[Babylon]

.. what is not to understand? I'm not speaking French.

No, I'm not saying that that is what happened. I'm not even saying there WERE controlled explosions. I am saying if there were then that is one possible explanation and that, to me, it seems far more believable than George Bush and his administration staging the entire event from start to finish.

And assuming it did happen, what contemporary government would own up to it?

It's not worth arguing, they have no evidence. For every quote from a scientist,quote from a witness or youtube video, there will be 100's of accounts saying the exact opposite. They use half truths, partial quotations, dodgy science etc to try and point the finger.

They ask for concrete evidence from governments but latch onto "evidence" that would most probably be laughed out of court when trying to prove their side. They make no account for human error, a reporter making a mistake doing a piece to camera, or some government spokesmen saying the wrong thing. If they do it instantly means there is a cover up. Questioning what you are told is fine, I'd say anyone should do that. But these people have gone past that, they WANT it all to be lies.

Without any proof of his death I will reserve judgement on Bin Laden. My mind will stay open on it until one way or the other something concrete is proved. Unfortunately these guys minds are already made up, there is a conspiracy, end of story. How can anyone with that mind set be taken seriously?

[Finnegan]

It's not worth arguing

All that is necessary for stupid to triumph is that smart people say nothing.

[Zingari]

It's not worth arguing, they have no evidence. For every quote from a scientist,quote from a witness or youtube video, there will be 100's of accounts saying the exact opposite. They use half truths, partial quotations, dodgy science etc to try and point the finger.

They ask for concrete evidence from governments but latch onto "evidence" that would most probably be laughed out of court when trying to prove their side. They make no account for human error, a reporter making a mistake doing a piece to camera, or some government spokesmen saying the wrong thing. If they do it instantly means there is a cover up. Questioning what you are told is fine, I'd say anyone should do that. But these people have gone past that, they WANT it all to be lies.

Without any proof of his death I will reserve judgement on Bin Laden. My mind will stay open on it until one way or the other something concrete is proved. Unfortunately these guys minds are already made up, there is a conspiracy, end of story. How can anyone with that mind set be taken seriously?

Show us all a steel structured building falling down due to fire within an hour and i'll accept that the conspiracy theory is based on dodgy science ( even sosban is accepting that explosives were a possibility in a roundabout ambiguous way )

There must be hundreds of steel framed towers around the world awaiting demolition , why can't they indulge us with a little practical demonstration of fire bringing one down .

Surely it would be more cost effective way of bringing down buildings without the need for explosives and expert demolition teams ?

Sorry, but when scientists claim to prove things , i like to see a practical demonstration whenever it's possible .And I can't see any obstacles as to why they do not recreate this effect for all to see and put the issue to bed once and for all

[lou]

Oh wow 9/11 conspricy theories... its like Ive never been away

Wheres El Empty???

[Finnegan]

( even sosban is accepting that explosives were a possibility in a roundabout ambiguous way )

The key word being possibility. It's just as possible that the whole thing has been reported largely accurately and that your "sources" are bullshit.

Questioning what you read should extend beyond professional news outlets and official political voices, otherwise you're just a braindead hypocrite.

[Guest Bilo]

Never far away when there's a conspiracy theory is your answer to that one!

I don't think anyone's suggesting that the fire alone would bring down the building, more the combination of the fire and a 170,000 pound airliner slamming into the steel skeleton at 600mph and weakening it.

[I am Rod Hull]

Im on the fence in this debate but i noticed this news clip last night...

Quote "

It is widely accepted in popular culture that "too much" blinking of the eyes during questioning is a telltale sign that the subject is being deceptive. Body language experts often point to a person's blinking patterns as an indication of lying. The psychology behind this reasoning is that blinking of the eyes is one of many signs of nervousness (others include sweating, fidgeting or refusing to make eye contact). Proponents of this theory reason that a person who is lying is nervous about the deception and cannot control certain physical and/or neurological reactions that result from the stress of deception."

I counted 52 blinks in 1 minute...

[marko]

Show us all a steel structured building falling down due to fire within an hour and i'll accept that the conspiracy theory is based on dodgy science ( even sosban is accepting that explosives were a possibility in a roundabout ambiguous way )

There must be hundreds of steel framed towers around the world awaiting demolition , why can't they indulge us with a little practical demonstration of fire bringing one down .

Surely it would be more cost effective way of bringing down buildings without the need for explosives and expert demolition teams ?

Sorry, but when scientists claim to prove things , i like to see a practical demonstration whenever it's possible .And I can't see any obstacles as to why they do not recreate this effect for all to see and put the issue to bed once and for all

Do you not think that buildings are designed and constructed in different ways? To make it a fair and comparable test you'd have to fly a plane into a replica structure to ensure the structure was damaged in exactly the same way.

On a side note, why is there no sound of explosions when the building collapses? Which if you claim was a controlled demolition there would be.