• Osama Bin Laden not buried at sea, cremated, according to leaked intelligence
    87 replies, posted
This wouldn't surprise me in the least.
And suddenly this is going to fuel the biggest conspiracy theory there is
[QUOTE=solid_jake;35034918]And suddenly this is going to fuel the biggest conspiracy theory there is[/QUOTE] This hasn't done anything to fuel a conspiracy theory, any conspiracy theories were already started once we heard that he was killed.
Wait, the title isn't even consistent with the article. It says the body was headed for the Institute of Pathology, not cremated.
Who cares? At least he's dead.
[QUOTE=Swebonny;35034892]How does that change the fact that these emails did appear in the heap of leaked mails? Just because it's a shit paper doesn't mean they make up their news.[/QUOTE] And what did those emails say exactly? Or are you willing to trust the Daily mail's convenient paraphrasing?
Another source, then I'll believe it.
[QUOTE=Reimu;35034672]Just seems suspicious to me that they suddenly want to "chop off the head of LulzSec" after this specific leak, instead of much earlier.[/QUOTE] They didn't decide "just now" to "chop the head off lulzsec". They've been investigating for a very long time now and now they finally had enough to make some more arrests. They don't have somekinda hollywood spook magic powers that allow them to just decide and arrest someone on a couple of days notice.
Who gives a fuck, and why should I? It's a dead body, what are they going to do? Clone super soldiers out of him? Get real.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;35034991]And what did those emails say exactly? Or are you willing to trust the Daily mail's convenient paraphrasing?[/QUOTE] That's why you have to be critical and do your own work of digging up the source they are using. Face it, news papers doesn't make up their own news. They can bend and twist their words however the much they want, but they won't get away with spewing out lies or doing weird stuff. (look at The Sun) This is what they are referring to, whether they are true or not I cannot know. [url]http://wikileaks.org/gifiles/releasedate/2012-02-29-18-obl-s-body-transfered-to-delaware-with-cia.html[/url]
[QUOTE=Falchion;35035021]They didn't decide "just now" to "chop the head off lulzsec". They've been investigating for a very long time now and now they finally had enough to make some more arrests. They don't have somekinda hollywood spook magic powers that allow them to just decide and arrest someone on a couple of days notice.[/QUOTE] Yeah but why choose to do it now right after this information comes out? Why not sooner or later? In-fact the fact that they've been building a case for so long and decide to act right after this leak comes out supports my point of view. I'm not talking about the FBI's focus; everyone knows the FBI has been building a case against LulzSec. It's a question of why the specific timing to act.
[QUOTE=Reimu;35035320]I'm not talking about the FBI's focus; everyone knows the FBI has been building a case against LulzSec. It's a question of why the specific timing to act.[/QUOTE] Because they only just finished gathering information, making reports, confirming sources and getting permission to go after them maybe? They can't just up and go arrest anyone they believe involved at random. There is no conspiracy behind this, it's just purely coincidence.
[QUOTE=Swebonny;35034892]How does that change the fact that these emails did appear in the heap of leaked mails? Just because it's a shit paper doesn't mean they make up their news.[/QUOTE] Remember this? [IMG]http://i.huffpost.com/gen/366575/DAILY-MAIL.jpg[/IMG] It was made up.
[QUOTE=Swebonny;35035118]That's why you have to be critical and do your own work of digging up the source they are using. Face it, news papers doesn't make up their own news. They can bend and twist their words however the much they want, but they won't get away with spewing out lies or doing weird stuff. (look at The Sun) This is what they are referring to, whether they are true or not I cannot know. [url]http://wikileaks.org/gifiles/releasedate/2012-02-29-18-obl-s-body-transfered-to-delaware-with-cia.html[/url][/QUOTE] But you're acting as if I announced my own critical opinion on the subject. All I did was remind people that the Daily Mail is dubious. And thus should do exactly that you just said. I don't really see your point. [editline]7th March 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Starpluck;35035388]Remember this? [IMG]http://i.huffpost.com/gen/366575/DAILY-MAIL.jpg[/IMG] It was made up.[/QUOTE] Hah I remember that.
Also for everyone who is asking about how this ties to LulzSec: [quote]The fifth person charged is Jeremy Hammond, 27, of Chicago, US, who was arrested and charged on Monday for alleged offences relating to the December 2011 hacking of global intelligence firm Strategic Forecasting. He is charged with one count of computer hacking conspiracy, one count of computer hacking, and one count of conspiracy to commit access device fraud.[/quote] Strategic Forecasting is Stratfor FYI. [url]http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/mar/06/lulzsec-sabu-working-for-us-fbi?newsfeed=true[/url]
How shocking In other news: Grass is green.
I honestly don't care as long as he's dead.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;35035392]But you're acting as if I announced my own critical opinion on the subject. All I did was remind people that the Daily Mail is dubious. And thus should do exactly that you just said. I don't really see your point. [/QUOTE] Ah alright then, I assumed that you assumed that they made the story up, I mean it was hard to extract information from [QUOTE=NoDachi;35034677]dailymail[/QUOTE] It's kinda the same thing as typing "rt" because someone used Russia Today or "fox news" because someone use Fox News. I just get annoyed by it, because it leads nowhere and is pretty much a shit post. [editline]7th March 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Starpluck;35035388]Remember this? [IMG]http://i.huffpost.com/gen/366575/DAILY-MAIL.jpg[/IMG] It was made up.[/QUOTE] That's intersting I've never seen that before. I assume she wasn't guilty at all?
[QUOTE=Swebonny;35034892]How does that change the fact that these emails did appear in the heap of leaked mails? Just because it's a shit paper doesn't mean they make up their news.[/QUOTE] The emails don't even confirm this, it's just one guy in them saying he doubts the white house story. He doesn't even make an argument, he just says he doubts it.
[QUOTE=The Baconator;35036010]The emails don't even confirm this, it's just one guy in them saying he doubts the white house story. He doesn't even make an argument, he just says he doubts it.[/QUOTE] I didn't claim that anything got confirmed. All I'm saying is: [B]How does that change the fact that these emails did appear in the heap of leaked mails? [/B] That's the main point of my post. What I'm wanting people to do is to stop shitting up threads with lines such as : "dailymail" "russia today" "the sun" "fox news"
Who gives a shit about what happend to his body. He's dead, thats all the matters.
Why would they lie about this? [editline]7th March 2012[/editline] I mean, like, saying they cremated him would've given them less trouble than telling everyone he's buried in the sea.
[QUOTE=MisterSjeiks;35036230]Why would they lie about this? [editline]7th March 2012[/editline] I mean, like, saying they cremated him would've given them less trouble than telling everyone he's buried in the sea.[/QUOTE] Apparently cremation is a big no no in islamic law while burial at sea, although not preferable, is acceptable.
[quote]But in a particular set of emails given to WikiLeaks, the firm’s vice president for intelligence, Fred Burton, says he doubts the official White House version of what happened to bin Laden's body.[/quote] hmmm
[QUOTE=squids_eye;35036317]Apparently cremation is a big no no in islamic law while burial at sea, although not preferable, is acceptable.[/QUOTE] Murder is also a big no no in Islamic Law, but he didn't seem to mind much. I doubt he would've cared if he was cremated anyways..
[QUOTE=Combin0wnage;35036398]Murder is also a big no no in Islamic Law, but he didn't seem to mind much. I doubt he would've cared if he was cremated anyways..[/QUOTE] It's not about him, it's about not pissing off any of his supporters more than they already have.
[QUOTE=Swebonny;35034892] Just because it's a shit paper doesn't mean they make up their news.[/QUOTE] You have no idea.
[QUOTE=Swebonny;35036111]I didn't claim that anything got confirmed. All I'm saying is: [B]How does that change the fact that these emails did appear in the heap of leaked mails? [/B] That's the main point of my post. What I'm wanting people to do is to stop shitting up threads with lines such as : "dailymail" "russia today" "the sun" "fox news"[/QUOTE] No that's the thing, I do acknowledge it was there. But so what? He does not work for the government, he is not the lead guy, he is not even claiming something as a fact. This is some guys at work (in a private firm) exchanging what is basically small talk. It's only because this firm has a reputation for being some super secret cool wannabe CIA company. Without it, it might as well be a barrista from a Starbucks in Beverly Hills :v:
Watch as in a few months, zombie bin laden appears out of nowhere, somehow.
[QUOTE=Swebonny;35036111]I didn't claim that anything got confirmed. All I'm saying is: [B]How does that change the fact that these emails did appear in the heap of leaked mails? [/B] That's the main point of my post. What I'm wanting people to do is to stop shitting up threads with lines such as : "dailymail" "russia today" "the sun" "fox news"[/QUOTE] Again though, we don't know that. The Daily Mail article says it, and they could very well be paraphrasing. NoDachi is just saying that you need to be very skeptical of this source and sources like it, because they will skew the story or even make it up entirely. Frankly, there should be some kind of rule against terrible sources.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.