It's About Liberty: A Conservative Forum

Topics => Radical Islam/GWOT => Topic started by: charlesoakwood on August 22, 2011, 12:19:26 AM

Title: Stratfor disputes OBL killing
Post by: charlesoakwood on August 22, 2011, 12:19:26 AM

I hear a comment coming soon from Ann.

Link (http://nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/Politics/19-Aug-2011/Stratfor-disputes-OBL-killing-in-Abbottabad)

Quote
ISLAMABAD - Globally recognised intelligence and forecast STRATFOR has rejected the US Central Intelligence Agency claim that the man killed in Abbottabad’s compound by US Naval SEALs was al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden.
...
Pakistan’s former spymaster Lt Gen (r) Hamid Gul told TheNation they never challenged credence of the STRATFOR. “I agree with the latest intelligence gathering about May 2 operation’s follow up. This remains one of the reasons the CIA never informed its Pakistan counterpart ISI when it decided to kill a fake bin Laden”, he said.



Title: Re: Stratfor disputes OBL killing
Post by: rickl on August 22, 2011, 12:40:00 AM
I've believed he's been dead for years.

 ::popcorn::
Title: Re: Stratfor disputes OBL killing
Post by: IronDioPriest on August 22, 2011, 02:02:42 AM
A distraction, meant to create a controversy during the election season in which the Leftists can portray deniers of the official account as radical extremists?

Given the track record, it would be foolish not to suspect such a cynical maneuver as one possibility.
Title: Re: Stratfor disputes OBL killing
Post by: AlanS on August 22, 2011, 07:38:17 AM
A distraction, meant to create a controversy during the election season in which the Leftists can portray deniers of the official account as radical extremists?

Given the track record, it would be foolish not to suspect such a cynical maneuver as one possibility.

Wouldn't be the first time nor the last.
Title: Re: Stratfor disputes OBL killing
Post by: Libertas on August 22, 2011, 08:29:48 AM
I've been loath to broach this subject ever since I got wind of it, mostly because it is so outrageous and because requires a conspiracy of momentous proportions...but since Stratfor is raising this I guess now is as good a time to discuss this.  If OBL was not killed in that compound, then who was?  Stratfor seems to think just another bad guy worth snuffing.  fine, I'm OK withthat, but why CIA and others insist it was OBL? 

The article mentions this -

The Washinton-based journalist termed the crash of US Army’s Chinook helicopter and killings of over 36 US Naval SEALs as a part of the effort to finish left over evidence which could lead to facts of May 2 US action in Abbottabad.”

That statement seems to echo the disturbing narrative I heard is that this was not OBL but played up to be OBL so as to give Obama a boost in the polls at a time when he was starting to tank big time.  Now, it appears this is a desperate length to go to just to get a bounce in the polls so far removed from election day, so to me it seems ridiculous.  An October surprise next year would have made more sense for such a stunt.  More disturbingly, some chatter has been asserting that the downing of the SEALs in Afghanistan was orchestrated to keep those who knew the truth about who was or was not killed in the Abbottobad compound raid.  This to me is unthinkable and would require the assistance of too many people to keep under wraps.  The very thought that people in our government and military and security services could be capable of executing such a despicable act enrages me to volcanic heights.  I simply find it impossible to believe such a conspiracy is possible for such a flimsy purpose!

I am left having to come up with other weak sounding excuses as to why the 160th wasn't used for the SEALs, why they SEALs were and a routine rotation and all the other extenuating issues one hand; and on the other hand coming up with reasons why I should trust a government run by a POS like Obama who seems to corrupt everything and everyone he comes into contact with.

The other option is that the two incidents are unrealted and that maybe OBL wasn't whacked and that's why Obama never released any photos and the SEALs going down was just an accident.

 ::whatgives::
Title: Re: Stratfor disputes OBL killing
Post by: Alphabet Soup on August 22, 2011, 09:15:54 AM
Here's the problem with this: accusations like these are long on insinuation, but short on supporting evidence. Show me an intercepted order to scuttle the ship and I'm right there with the accusers, ready to take to the streets. Lacking that I may toss a bone of encouragement, but that should not be taken as a sign of support.
Title: Re: Stratfor disputes OBL killing
Post by: charlesoakwood on August 22, 2011, 10:38:07 AM

A scenario:

Top Secret knowledge Binladen died in the mountains of kidney failure...
An opportunity to kill the rumor he is alive and a political advantage presents itself simultaneously...
Bumbling advisers encourage incompetent upstream command to take advantage of situation...
Exponential calamity results from incompetent command...
                                                       

Title: Re: Stratfor disputes OBL killing
Post by: trapeze on August 22, 2011, 11:14:53 AM
I will restate my position on this once more just to keep my hand in:

"Successful conspiracy" is almost always an oxymoron*. Someone always talks. Usually lots of someones.

Watergate, Iran Contra, Fast & Furious to name but a few of the times when someone squealed.

It's hard enough to keep a secret when the people involved know that national security is on the line but almost impossible to keep quiet when the supposed goal is to save the bacon of an incompetent president.

There is also the very disturbing thought of the consequences of murdering SEALs. Making enemies of highly trained, highly motivated and independently thinking killers is not very smart.

You can make a case for the OBL raid being fake...after all, there is no evidence that it was authentic. No body, no pictures and no witnesses who will ever talk.

But it is extremely unlikely that you can make a case for the military killing its own to cover up for the political ambitions of a moron.

* The phrase, "dead men tell no tales" is no accident.
Title: Re: Stratfor disputes OBL killing
Post by: Libertas on August 22, 2011, 11:16:23 AM
I hear ya 'Soup, I am not ready to drink that Kool Aid just yet.

 ::foilhathelicopter::

I still scoff at all the conspiracy theories put forth about JFK...the sheer scale of deception required among so many for so long apears to be impossible to contain.  So where's the proof?  The best proof on JFK is the modern forensic science that showed it was not just probable but almost a certainty the shots all came from the Depsoitory.  But Jesse (the Mindless) Ventura is conviced that if he can't make the shots nobody can.  Myths continue.  Myths concerning OBL & SEALs seems to be starting.  This sick part is with the most disingenous and deceptive POTUS in history occupying office when all these events go down is the fact that so many people find it possible to think the worst of their government.  Some of that distrust is well earned.

As for accidents CO...accidents per se I can beleive in, this one would have some truly bad karma to retain coincidental status.  I think a mixed bag of bungling and accidents is probably the likely outcome.  But as 'Soup says, where is the evidence?  We have nothing to confirm who was hit in Abbottobad, and the SEAL plane crash physical evidence (as far as I know) has not had any info released about it.

The lack of an evidence trail may or may not be nefarious.

Title: Re: Stratfor disputes OBL killing
Post by: Damn_Lucky on August 23, 2011, 07:06:20 PM
 ::lalanotlistening:: ::saywhat:: ::hysterical:: ::hysterical:: ::mooning::
Title: Re: Stratfor disputes OBL killing
Post by: jpatrickham on September 01, 2011, 09:56:48 AM
Nothing Barack Obama and his Army of Misinformation would surprise me. Bin Laden's Picture please? I am waiting! ::oldman::