Why would the U.S. government dump "Usama Bin Laden's body" in the middle of the ocean, ensuring no further analysis could be performed, so soon after his death?
Why would they whisk the 911 wreckage off to smelters in Canada and China before anyone could examine it; even their own people. Why would they destroy Sandy Hook School before anyone could examine it, and then buy the alleged shooters house for $1.00 so nobody else could get it; and then destroy his things before anyone could examine those. Why has $27,000,000.00 been gifted to Sandy hook survivors and the City Of Sandy Hook; it had never happened before, though millions have also been gifted to the alleged Boston bombing victims since.
Because they're full of shit and hold the citizens of the world as idiots.
The fact no one seemed to care too much (no protests, no demands for actions/accountability, etc) means they are correct: either everyone is an idiot or no one cares enough to act.
Osama, even though he was never connected to 9/11 nor wanted by the FBI, was still one of the major reasons of the invasion and subsequent occupation of Afghanistan.
Let's set aside for a moment whether or not it happened so we can answer your question. It's a practice that has a lot of history to it, a leader's body can carry with it a lot of power after death, probably the craziest example of this I can think of is the multiple kidnappings of Alexander the Great's body by his generals as they fought over who got what parts Alexander's empire.
Hitler was burned and thrown into a river, Gaius Marius's ashes and bones were thrown into a river by a rival, Christian martyrs's remains were often thrown into rivers as well. These are all acts to disperse the power surrounding these remains, a group being able to gather around relics of significance can lend a lot of power to their cause, bodies of waters have traditionally been a great way for the opposition to stop this from happening.
So in Osama's case, why would we do it? Well, what would you do with it? Bury it in an unmarked grave? Bury in a marked grave and guard it? The body wasn't going to be left at Osama's home right so the Navy Seals took it back to their closest base of operations, a ship. Once the body is on the ship you're going to do what with it? Like I said, bring it to America and bury it? Fly it back to Pakistan and bury it there? You're going to dump it in the ocean after gathering pictures and any samples from the corpse that you want. Did you want them to return it to America and hand it over to Dateline to perform an autopsy?
Those are the two reasons you'd dump his body in the ocean, to counteract the power that his dead body could confer to his followers and conviennence; whether this happened is a different question.
The president himself used "Osama bin Laden" in the press event that declared the operation that killed him.
But, to entertain you, why do you think there is any possibility of confusing the president of the united states and the leader of al-qaeda?
One lives in the white house, is african american, works as a president which is one of the most public jobs in the world and appears daily in the media.
Other is an arab terrorist leader who spent his last decade in hiding, dresses in traditional afghan garments with a long beard, appeared in media through pretaped videos.
You got some valid points, but, try to think of it from the standard dumbassespount of view. Will they confuse them? Probly not. Will the make assassociations? Certainly. Sometimes thats all it takes.
There are many Fox News references to "Usama" just after the events of 9/11. The myth was Osama bin Laden hated the USA so much it apparently pained him to have his name spelt with it: USAma. It most certainly has nothing to do with today's President.
What the hell makes you think I love them? It's just something I remember seeing all the time on Fox News, when I was a kid. Well before Obama was a prominent public figure. Look it up yourself. You're on the Internet. You can obviously form sentences, so do a quick search. You're clearly the one who made little effort to make sure your ridiculous claim was correct. Now, see if your theory pans out.
I didn't find "any other mainstream sources", because I don't fucking care to look. It's not my theory to prove. The point was, you are under the impression that "Usama" was this strange new thing being put out just before the staged Abbottabad Raid. My point was it's not a new thing and it goes back to W's presidency. You're wrong. Flat out. What's worse is you didn't take the time to fact check your own theory before putting out bullshit conjecture then tried to turn it around as if your point wasn't that is was suddenly just used before the raid. Furthermore, the fact that you assumed I exclusively get my news from one source explains way more about you than it does about me. You don't know me, but have fun pretending you do.
P.S. I never claimed any other "news" channel made references to "Usama". I just made the point that it predates Obama. Re-read comment thread if necessary.
Edit: Also, at the time I'm referring to, Fox News was more commonplace than CNN, which before then was the go to channel during Desert Storm.
The issue isn't whether or not I'm a Fox New fan, which I'm the furthest thing from. As if you really fucking care. I don't trust any of them. They're mostly a lot of bullshit with some sprinkles of truth, which is besides the point. The issue is the fact that in your mind "Usama" became a thing just prior to the raid. All I said was it's not something that just became a thing as it was referenced quite often on Fox News- when I was a kid. That's it. I didn't care then, but I remember it being used and everyone parroting it as if Osama had released a statement to the world. After, I said that, you changed your tune to dismiss them as a news outlet. Seeing as Fox News took off as a major news channel after 9/11 and especially during the lead up to the Iraq War, I would say it was pretty common source for most Americans news, therefore it was a common form of spelling prior to Obama being nationally known. Which is before the goddamn raid. That's the point. You're a fool if you can't see that... or a Master Troll. Honestly, it's up in the air at this point. Either way, I'm done. Have fun pretending you're right or superior in any way.
It is the spelling they used in "Zero Dark Thirty" because the case agents at the CIA who spoke Arabic believed this was the correct translation, not Osama. But generally it is like the difference between color and colour. They are both the same word yet spelled slightly different based on what culture is translating it.
24 comments
18 alllie 2014-12-08
They wouldn't.
13 Nogrim 2014-12-08
because the real one died years ago from kidney failure...
1 skywalk818 2014-12-08
that
12 s70n3834r 2014-12-08
Why would they whisk the 911 wreckage off to smelters in Canada and China before anyone could examine it; even their own people. Why would they destroy Sandy Hook School before anyone could examine it, and then buy the alleged shooters house for $1.00 so nobody else could get it; and then destroy his things before anyone could examine those. Why has $27,000,000.00 been gifted to Sandy hook survivors and the City Of Sandy Hook; it had never happened before, though millions have also been gifted to the alleged Boston bombing victims since.
9 JamesColesPardon 2014-12-08
Because it didn't happen.
9 inkandpaperguy 2014-12-08
Let's face it, if the US government had caught OBL they would parade him around like a 3 headed baby at a medical conference.
Just like the NIST report on 9/11, I do not know what actually happened but the official story is absolute bullshit.
3 leftystrat 2014-12-08
Didn't you just answer your own question? (assuming they did)
3 Greg_Roberts_0985 2014-12-08
The US government lied, evidence suggests he was dead before the year 2002
3 Ambiguously_Ironic 2014-12-08
Because he had already been dead for a decade and the official story was a blatant lie.
3 lyyphe23 2014-12-08
Accepting that story is equivalent to a parent whose child tells them "I got an A on my test!" but threw it in the garbage on the way home.
3 un1ty 2014-12-08
Because they're full of shit and hold the citizens of the world as idiots.
The fact no one seemed to care too much (no protests, no demands for actions/accountability, etc) means they are correct: either everyone is an idiot or no one cares enough to act.
Osama, even though he was never connected to 9/11 nor wanted by the FBI, was still one of the major reasons of the invasion and subsequent occupation of Afghanistan.
1 durable 2014-12-08
Let's set aside for a moment whether or not it happened so we can answer your question. It's a practice that has a lot of history to it, a leader's body can carry with it a lot of power after death, probably the craziest example of this I can think of is the multiple kidnappings of Alexander the Great's body by his generals as they fought over who got what parts Alexander's empire.
Hitler was burned and thrown into a river, Gaius Marius's ashes and bones were thrown into a river by a rival, Christian martyrs's remains were often thrown into rivers as well. These are all acts to disperse the power surrounding these remains, a group being able to gather around relics of significance can lend a lot of power to their cause, bodies of waters have traditionally been a great way for the opposition to stop this from happening.
So in Osama's case, why would we do it? Well, what would you do with it? Bury it in an unmarked grave? Bury in a marked grave and guard it? The body wasn't going to be left at Osama's home right so the Navy Seals took it back to their closest base of operations, a ship. Once the body is on the ship you're going to do what with it? Like I said, bring it to America and bury it? Fly it back to Pakistan and bury it there? You're going to dump it in the ocean after gathering pictures and any samples from the corpse that you want. Did you want them to return it to America and hand it over to Dateline to perform an autopsy?
Those are the two reasons you'd dump his body in the ocean, to counteract the power that his dead body could confer to his followers and conviennence; whether this happened is a different question.
1 JuanGoodman 2014-12-08
Because Bin Laden hasn't been killed
0 Sabremesh 2014-12-08
Why would the US media suddenly stop referring to Osama bin Laden and start calling him "Usama" before the Abbottabad raid?
Would it be because the US administration was concerned that people would be confused between Obama and Osama? Serious question.
2 GundalfTheCamo 2014-12-08
The president himself used "Osama bin Laden" in the press event that declared the operation that killed him.
But, to entertain you, why do you think there is any possibility of confusing the president of the united states and the leader of al-qaeda?
One lives in the white house, is african american, works as a president which is one of the most public jobs in the world and appears daily in the media.
Other is an arab terrorist leader who spent his last decade in hiding, dresses in traditional afghan garments with a long beard, appeared in media through pretaped videos.
Why would someone worry about mistaking the two?
-1 coldsteel27 2014-12-08
You got some valid points, but, try to think of it from the standard dumbassespount of view. Will they confuse them? Probly not. Will the make assassociations? Certainly. Sometimes thats all it takes.
Lame example: Superman and Bizarro
1 Really_Dont_Know 2014-12-08
There are many Fox News references to "Usama" just after the events of 9/11. The myth was Osama bin Laden hated the USA so much it apparently pained him to have his name spelt with it: USAma. It most certainly has nothing to do with today's President.
-2 Sabremesh 2014-12-08
Apart from your beloved Fox News, can you cite some other mainstream news sources that used "Usama" before Obama's Abbottabad hoax?
1 Really_Dont_Know 2014-12-08
What the hell makes you think I love them? It's just something I remember seeing all the time on Fox News, when I was a kid. Well before Obama was a prominent public figure. Look it up yourself. You're on the Internet. You can obviously form sentences, so do a quick search. You're clearly the one who made little effort to make sure your ridiculous claim was correct. Now, see if your theory pans out.
-2 Sabremesh 2014-12-08
So you didn't find any other mainstream media sources using "Usama", because they didn't - it's Osama.
The fact that you were under the impression that Usama was commonplace suggests you rely exclusively on Fox for your "news". This explains a lot.
1 Really_Dont_Know 2014-12-08
I didn't find "any other mainstream sources", because I don't fucking care to look. It's not my theory to prove. The point was, you are under the impression that "Usama" was this strange new thing being put out just before the staged Abbottabad Raid. My point was it's not a new thing and it goes back to W's presidency. You're wrong. Flat out. What's worse is you didn't take the time to fact check your own theory before putting out bullshit conjecture then tried to turn it around as if your point wasn't that is was suddenly just used before the raid. Furthermore, the fact that you assumed I exclusively get my news from one source explains way more about you than it does about me. You don't know me, but have fun pretending you do.
P.S. I never claimed any other "news" channel made references to "Usama". I just made the point that it predates Obama. Re-read comment thread if necessary.
Edit: Also, at the time I'm referring to, Fox News was more commonplace than CNN, which before then was the go to channel during Desert Storm.
-1 Sabremesh 2014-12-08
Stick to Fox, then, but don't get whiny when people accuse you of being a Foxnews fanboi.
If you can trouble yourself to expand your horizons, here are some WhiteHouse.gov references to "Usama bin Laden".
http://search.whitehouse.gov/search?affiliate=wh&query=%2Busama+bin+laden
They are contemporaneous with the 2011 Abbottabad raid. All prior references appear to be to "Osama". Just sayin'.
1 Really_Dont_Know 2014-12-08
The issue isn't whether or not I'm a Fox New fan, which I'm the furthest thing from. As if you really fucking care. I don't trust any of them. They're mostly a lot of bullshit with some sprinkles of truth, which is besides the point. The issue is the fact that in your mind "Usama" became a thing just prior to the raid. All I said was it's not something that just became a thing as it was referenced quite often on Fox News- when I was a kid. That's it. I didn't care then, but I remember it being used and everyone parroting it as if Osama had released a statement to the world. After, I said that, you changed your tune to dismiss them as a news outlet. Seeing as Fox News took off as a major news channel after 9/11 and especially during the lead up to the Iraq War, I would say it was pretty common source for most Americans news, therefore it was a common form of spelling prior to Obama being nationally known. Which is before the goddamn raid. That's the point. You're a fool if you can't see that... or a Master Troll. Honestly, it's up in the air at this point. Either way, I'm done. Have fun pretending you're right or superior in any way.
1 [deleted] 2014-12-08
It is the spelling they used in "Zero Dark Thirty" because the case agents at the CIA who spoke Arabic believed this was the correct translation, not Osama. But generally it is like the difference between color and colour. They are both the same word yet spelled slightly different based on what culture is translating it.