Kojiro wrote:There's no evidence, dude. All we have is a story from Obama.
True, but misleading.
If the story is not true, then the following must be (this is how you deconstruct conspiracy theories, try it with the moon landing or the JFK assasination, and see what mind-boggling stuff you have to assume for your theory to be true):
- Obama is lying, about something which he knows can be easily disproven by one of his worst enemies, by way of a simple videotape and a copy of todays paper. (So you either have to assume Bin Laden is non-existent, or allied with Obama).
Osama's been dead for ten years. There's been no sign of life from him since 2002 and he had failing kidneys and diabetes while living in a damp cave. Do the math, please.
- Obama is lying, about something which hundreds of patriotic soldiers (roughly half of which did not vote for him) can easily disprove. Air crew, control tower crew, logistics, intelligence officers without the harddisks they claim they have, burial crew including a Muslim preacher - everyone of these persons are lying, or willing to cover up the lie. Not one of them able to send a simple email to wikileaks...
Assuming they didn't have his corpse on ice and his stuff all along from the Bush years, just waiting for the appropriate political moment like Madeleine friggin' Albright and other officials (both current and former) had been suggesting for years now. Or are they nuts too?
Obama needs a better approval rating and reelection, viola... instant Obama dead story. Files instantly released to military intelligence. It's not hard to "recover" something you've already had.
And furthermore, have you interviewed all of these soldiers you speak of? Military operates on a need-to-know basis... if they're just handed something and told it came from somewhere, they're not suppose to question and instead follow orders. For an example of this, look at the Osama assassination story itself. Allegedly the SEALs and the Pakistani authorities didn't know they were going after bin Laden. It's just how the military operates.
- Since Obama claims to have DNA evidence, which matches with a known sister, he must have arranged for another persons DNA with the same match. And that person must also be someone not interested in calling Obama's bluff.
Yeah, who did the DNA testing? And where is the DNA itself to start with? Can this get independent review or is that a matter of "national security" too?
- Obama is further betting that he will never need the phtotographic evidence he claims to have. Not for diplomatic, military or legal use.
Much like KJA and BH don't think we ever need to see the "notes."
- Every one of his advisors, who was allegedly part of the many meetings up to the operation, are also lying and equally willing to bet their not-entirely-negligible careers and reputations.
Well clearly, if they want to remain his advisors.....
Or, a terrorist was found using HUMINT, and subsequently killed. Which is more likely?
They might've killed someone, but I'm doubting it was zombie Osama, risen from the grave for the umpteenth time.
Concerning being the only intelligent person in the world, I'm starting to feel like it around here. I find it appalling that people can just take the government's word for something without any proof. I require evidence before I accept something as fact. I doubt anyone would believe me if I just randomly claimed that I single-handedly broke up a drug deal or rescued an orphan from a fire without anything to back it up. So why should the government get a free pass when it doesn't supply evidence for its claims? Remember the alleged WMDs in Iraq? How'd that turn out? There were a bunch of intelligence guys involved there too, but it was still crap.
And we're apparently never going to see photos, conveniently given the "national security" excuse. As if terrorists everywhere haven't already threatened us.
Oh, but something "leaked."
Nice squirt gun. Not bin Laden though.