Bin Laden is dead

[Hildegard]

Walsh still didn't my post. Shame on you, shame shame shame....

 

The who the what now? Which post?

 

 

 

 

Must have been drunk or whatever when I forgot to write the word 'read'.

 

You've asked me to prove there is a difference between the so called insurgent groups in Iraq, you've never answered.

[Walsingham]

It's not on your rcent posts list on your profile, and I'm not wasting time on the search function. Can you link it?

[Hildegard]

http://forums.obsidian.net/index.php?showt...7328&st=255

 

This page.

[Junai]

Obama's hunted for a decade, killed in a few minutes and buried out to sea a few hours later.

Pictures are conveniently unavailable because of the nasty injuries he sustained during the operation.

 

Anyone who questions the media in any sort of way are branded as insane conspiracy theorists.

Any media-house which questions the official story is labled unserious and traitorous.

 

 

"The CIA owns everyone in the major media!

CIA Director William Colby, Fri Nov 19, 2004 20:23

 

 

 

There is a conspiracy theory for you.

 

 

 

J.

[GreasyDogMeat]

"The CIA owns everyone in the major media!

CIA Director William Colby, Fri Nov 19, 2004 20:23

 

There is a conspiracy theory for you.

 

J.

What conspiracy... media control or William Colby zombie conspiracy? 'Cause he supposedly died in 1996 you know...

[Walsingham]

http://forums.obsidian.net/index.php?showt...7328&st=255

 

This page.

 

OK. You had me right until your last paragraph.

 

I accept that there are groups with a greater or lesser emphasis on fighting (as you suggest) the Coalition, the Iraqi government, each other, other ethnic groups and so on.

 

What I don't accept is your thoroughly flawed argument that targetting Coalition forces makes any civilian casualties collateral damage. Collateral damage is what happens when you are subject to rigorous and thorough training, discipline and oversight to make sure that you do everything possible to avoid civilian casualties. It's not what happens when you attack a patrol with a huge bomb in a crowded market.

 

Even if you don't see any evidence for the above, just consider the dynamics. As representatives of the governing 'authority' ANY civilian deaths and general destruction actively undermines the mission of nation building, and critically wounds trust. There is therefore a payoff for insurgents/terrorists to provoke/cause civilian casualties, and a definite disincentive for the Coalition to do so.

 

With genuine respect for your obvious interest in the groups that have been conducting terror attacks in Iraq, I think you need to dedicate a little time to understanding the way at least the British Army fights under the rule of law. I presume you can choose your own books to do this with, but if you want some pointers I'd be happy to make some suggestions.

[Junai]

"The CIA owns everyone in the major media!

CIA Director William Colby, Fri Nov 19, 2004 20:23

 

There is a conspiracy theory for you.

 

J.

What conspiracy... media control or William Colby zombie conspiracy? 'Cause he supposedly died in 1996 you know...

Well.. both.

Open your mouth, and you tend to have unfortunate car/plane/boat-accidents. That's pretty standard.

 

J.

[Gfted1]

So youre not even going to acknowledge the fact that your supposed quote came 8 years after his death?

[Walsingham]

No offence, Junai. But you're not just insane because you're a conspiracy theorist. You've got some crazy Robert Shea time travelling **** going on.

[Junai]

Cited by McGowan 2004, Derailing Democracy.

Can't trust any bloody website these days..

[Gromnir]

Cited by McGowan 2004, Derailing Democracy.

 

...

 

who?

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Junai]

Alright, he's obviously not famous, even though the quote is.

I gotto start checking the debunking sites more often.

 

But I still think the whole Bin Laden killing was fishy. The world's most wanted terrorist killed

and dumped in a day, no pictures, no evidence. FFS we invaded a couple of countries and

involved the NATO b/c of that guy.

 

 

J.

[Gromnir]

Alright, he's obviously not famous, even though the quote is.

I gotto start checking the debunking sites more often.

 

is probable best to assume debunking sites is wrong until proven otherwise. the aforementioned quote is a good example o' why caution is warranted.

 

just so you is aware, we ain't picking on junai. but you know, we were recently contemplating whether we thought the internet were a boon or handicap for education. came to mind initial 'cause we saw multiple online sources that attributed to stalin that which were actual done/said by bukahrin. made us wonder. junai mentioned that his dead-man quote were famous. can you imagine such a questionable quote becoming famous in 1985? before the internet, folks had to actual does research and decide for themselves if info were trustworthy. you would go to library and use electronic and physical search aides to find sources. then you would read sources... not necessarily in their entirety, but you would have the physical copy in your hands, and you could/would read more than simple selected quotes. some questionable quote, authored by a nobody, and attributed to a man who had died 4 years before the quote were first used would become famous pre-internet? maybe. unlikely.

 

again, set way-back machine for mid-late 80's. if somebody on a college campus handed you a cheesy looking pamphlet that did posit some conspiracy theory, how likely would you be to repeat the contained quotes as if they were trustworthy?

 

...

 

knowledge has become so... cheap. is no longer earned with toil and sweat, and anybody with a website can be an authority. is not necessarily a bad thing. having so much more info available is a good thing... an amazing thing. is hard to explain to folks who has grown with the internet what it were like before such a thing were wide available. even so, am slightly saddened by how the perception o' knowledge has changed.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Gorth]

knowledge has become so... cheap. is no longer earned with toil and sweat, and anybody with a website can be an authority. is not necessarily a bad thing. having so much more info available is a good thing... an amazing thing. is hard to explain to folks who has grown with the internet what it were like before such a thing were wide available. even so, am slightly saddened by how the perception o' knowledge has changed.

Probably no comfort to you, but you are not the only one

 

(having been on the net since it was something "exclusive" used for information exchange to it became something "vulgar")

[Gromnir]

knowledge has become so... cheap. is no longer earned with toil and sweat, and anybody with a website can be an authority. is not necessarily a bad thing. having so much more info available is a good thing... an amazing thing. is hard to explain to folks who has grown with the internet what it were like before such a thing were wide available. even so, am slightly saddened by how the perception o' knowledge has changed.

Probably no comfort to you, but you are not the only one

 

(having been on the net since it was something "exclusive" used for information exchange to it became something "vulgar")

 

am not sure that we would says that we find your observation to be comforting, but that is quibbling o'er semantics. in actuality we does find it refreshing that others share our view.

 

our first real hands-on experience with the internet were in 1988 during a summer job while at berkeley. we had used commodore 64s and some oldy apple pcs in high school, but those things didn't have no internet access at the time. first time we used internet were kinda intimidating, and not very fun. we were not using windows friendly interfaces and we was sending/receiving pure technical data. was all very impersonal. sent stuff to computer names, not people.

 

lord knows we does not wish a return to ye good old days. we do not miss all the leg work. nevertheless, am thinking folks has lost something now that internet makes knowledge so accessible. is far less discipline.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Gorth]

our first real hands-on experience with the internet were in 1988 during a summer job while at berkeley. we had used commodore 64s and some oldy apple pcs in high school, but those things didn't have no internet access at the time. first time we used internet were kinda intimidating, and not very fun. we were not using windows friendly interfaces and we was sending/receiving pure technical data. was all very impersonal. sent stuff to computer names, not people.

 

lord knows we does not wish a return to ye good old days. we do not miss all the leg work. nevertheless, am thinking folks has lost something now that internet makes knowledge so accessible. is far less discipline.

That would have been around the same time. Got into university studying computer science. In the beginning, it was mostly mail exchange with tutors, project advisors and contacts at universities around the world. Then transferring source files and documentation, downloading software packages (University of Illinois UIUC had made this fancy Object Oriented OS which we used as a case study).

 

Working with Gohper and Archie protocols for searching the net was like making fire with two pieces of flint, but it gave you an idea of the underlying technology.

 

The geek in me looks back through rose coloured glasses, the comfort creature in me appreciate google and browsers that support graphics.

 

Ask people today how many has done anything in LaTeX and they look at you like you've just suggested something naughty

[Walsingham]

I certainly agree with Gromnir that referencing has got much more difficult to do well - in the eyes of normal people. For most people these days, the notion of going to an actual library is anathema.

[Nepenthe]

I certainly agree with Gromnir that referencing has got much more difficult to do well - in the eyes of normal people. For most people these days, the notion of going to an actual library is anathema.

The parliament library always kicks off my dust allergy.

[Junai]

Well, the quote doesn't originate from TeH Internetz.. it's from a book by a guy named David McGowan.

Little did I know that he was a conspiracy nutter (like myself ). The book is ull of shocking quotes,

with first source attributions.. except one - Colby's.

 

Also, I spent enough time in the Uni basement library - thankyouverymuch. Because of that, I took it

for granted that an author of.. any book, would be thorough and honest enough to quote the chief of the

CIA correctly, but there you go. Joke's on me.

 

Anyway, for CIA and the media, take a look at Carl Bernstein's Rolling Stone article from 77.

Slightly more.. reliable, and no less shocking.

http://www.carlbernstein.com/magazine_cia_and_media.php

 

 

And I still don't believe all that Bin Laden nonsense..

It gave Obama a lil boost when he needed it.

 

 

J.

[Nepenthe]

And I still don't believe all that Bin Laden nonsense..

It gave Obama a lil boost when he needed it.

Did it?

[Junai]

And I still don't believe all that Bin Laden nonsense..

It gave Obama a lil boost when he needed it.

Did it?

yup.. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/05/us/polit...5poll.html?_r=1

 

Pretty short-lived though. He's down again now..

 

 

J.

[Walsingham]

I think Junai organised Bin Laden's killing to cheer himself up.

 

Prove me wrong.

[Calax]

I think the killing bin laden will come back up in the election when the republican candidates will say that Obama has done nothing in the war on terror etc.

[Gfted1]

And I still don't believe all that Bin Laden nonsense..

It gave Obama a lil boost when he needed it.

 

 

J.

 

 

So the organization that he led confirming his death is all part of the deception?

 

My god, these fiends will stop at nothing...

[Hurlshort]

I think the killing bin laden will come back up in the election when the republican candidates will say that Obama has done nothing in the war on terror etc.

 

Yeah, unfortunately his only real success has been internationally. The two wars, while still moving at a snails pace, haven't gotten worse. He has had much better interactions with foreign powers than the previous administration. The revolutions that have forced changes in the Middle East and Africa can also be spun as a positive for him.

 

But none of that really matters, because the economy is effed up, and he hasn't been seen as handling it well at all. He can't bridge the two parties, and his approval ratings are in the dumps. He's going to need a miracle, or a Republican party that gives their ticket to a moron. The latter is unfortunately very likely.