What is this crap about Osama pics?

[PhoenixGodwin]

This is a follow up to the initial article found here.

It's been a day now and we still don't have any pictures. This isn't an issue of morbidity or personal satisfaction- it's about Truth. There's really no good reason for the 'debate' to have gone on this long, and evidence needs to be available to those who want it. An iron curtain on our own government is absolutely unacceptable.

For those who bring up the idea that the U.S. is concerned about antagonizing potential terrorists, that's a bullshit scapegoat argument. This is a country notorious for not negotiating with terrorist- that is to say that generally speaking we don't give a damn what they think, and if they don't like it they can go straight to hell.

Who here remembers Abu al-Zarqawi? After we assassinated him pictures of the body were released. And you know what? We didn't just dump him off in the ocean either. I'm pretty sure he wasn't even buried within 24 hrs of his death.

The thing is, a picture (especially at this point) really wouldn't be enough to be accepted as credible evidence by most people who already have doubts. That's part of what bothers me. I feel like the government would be smart enough to realize that not releasing the pictures would stir a significant amount of distrust whether it's unwarranted or not- especially since they got rid of the body so quickly.

I honestly believe they should release the video footage of the raid that the CIA most likely has (unless they did something else with particularly poor foresight- but I highly doubt that). This wouldn't really endanger anyone involved in the operation. We wouldn't be able to see the SEAL's faces, I'm sure. Any names could easily be removed, and they have a dynamic enough tactical system to where I doubt their general strategy could really be compromised by releasing it. Since the body is gone this is probably the only real substantial proof the people should accept. If the government cared about how much The People trust them (which it is of my strong opinion that they should) then they would be doing that, but they're not. They might later, but the longer they take the easier it is to fake it, which is why I've been trying to get other people to pay attention.

Even if they have been completely honest with us the whole time and just haven't been completely open, I want them to change because as naive as it may sound to some I think the Truth is important. I know I'm not the only one.

----------------------------------------

Also, for those of you who haven't caught on, stop clicking the links to Osama's death photos unless you are positive it leads to a reliable source.

[Sanch]

Obamas a pussy and doesnt want to piss off tose crazy muslims any more, especially considering how he's muslim himself.

they went batshit when salman rushdie drew mohammed in a newspaper, they'll go batshit over their equivalent of Abraham Lincoln shot being plastered on the inernet

[Bolo]

The photos are extremely graphic, bro. They shot two huge holes above his eyes. To release those photos, the president has to weigh the possible consequences, which includes creating an image of martyrdom for terrorists everywhere to rally around. There is also the question of appropriateness. After all, the white house is not ogrish.com, it's a dignified institution that prefers not to broadcast gory details to the world that are upsetting or disturbing.

[Me-Patch]

Nothing would satisfy OP. He made up his mind about this instantly. He's a 9/11 conspiracy junkie and a diluted fool.

[TheJamoke]

Video footage can be just as easily faked a photo. People would still cry bullshit.

Accept things and stop whining.

[Gagsy]

At 5/4/11 03:51 AM, Bolo wrote: The photos are extremely graphic, bro. They shot two huge holes above his eyes. To release those photos, the president has to weigh the possible consequences, which includes creating an image of martyrdom for terrorists everywhere to rally around. There is also the question of appropriateness. After all, the white house is not ogrish.com, it's a dignified institution that prefers not to broadcast gory details to the world that are upsetting or disturbing.

Thankfully an intelligent outlook on the situation.

This is the first reason why those fake photos look completely fake. They're almost pretty in relation to what the real thing must look like.

Plus yeah, showing the world that? Totally not right. I imagine the photo will be leaked eventually online. By the White House themselves but they'll deny that.

[RubberTrucky]

I call shenanigans.
If this really is Bin Laden, why isn't he naked and pooped on?

[Painbringer]

I'm ashamed of all you Newgrounders who don't care about the pics.

Time and time again we say to the OPs "pics or it never happened" but when it comes to the government, we simply take their word for it and move along.

Baaaah Baaaah

A bunch of sheep.

Goodnight.

[arbiterg]

GUYS HERE'S A REAL PIC OF HIS BODY IT JUST CAME OUT ON THE WEB!

Ho and by the way try not to jerk off on it too much!

[Asandir]

At 5/4/11 08:09 AM, arbiterg wrote: GUYS HERE'S A REAL PIC OF HIS BODY IT JUST CAME OUT ON THE WEB!

Ho and by the way try not to jerk off on it too much!

As far as I know, this was also proven to be fake in an other thread.

[Aprime]

At 5/4/11 08:14 AM, Asandir wrote:

At 5/4/11 08:09 AM, arbiterg wrote:

an other

LOL, hahaaha

[Asandir]

At 5/4/11 09:36 AM, Aprime wrote:

At 5/4/11 08:14 AM, Asandir wrote:

At 5/4/11 08:09 AM, arbiterg wrote:

an other

LOL, hahaaha

You laugh? You will stop laughing when you see the real pics!

It´s Star Wars Day! Come all and join the dark side by changing your aura to evil!

[megakill]

Can we all stop beating a dead horse?

I agree with the OP, the truth is important and it's the governments duty to be honest and open with the public about its actions, and provide reliable evidence to support its claims, however, no matter what the government does now, there will always be people who call bullshit.

They could release all the photos and video evidence but people will still claim its all been faked and that the government is hiding something.

And lets face it, chances are that they are hiding something. Not necessarily that they faked his death or whatever, but to live under the impression that the government is nothing but 100% honest and open about its actions is very naive indeed.

The truth is very important, but in a situation like this, no matter what the truth is, people will always debate it, and there's really nothing we can do. We can bitch and whine for evidence all we want, but even if we get it, some people will just be too stubborn to accept it.

[PhoenixGodwin]

At 5/4/11 03:21 AM, Sanch wrote:

Obamas a pussy and doesnt want to piss off tose crazy muslims any more, especially considering how he's muslim himself.

they went batshit when salman rushdie drew mohammed in a newspaper, they'll go batshit over their equivalent of Abraham Lincoln shot being plastered on the inernet

I know I specifically addressed this idea in the article. The U.S. government normally doesn't care about that sort of thing enough to let it conflict with their operations, and they certainly didn't before, like with Abu al-Zarqaw

At 5/4/11 03:51 AM, Bolo wrote:

The photos are extremely graphic, bro. They shot two huge holes above his eyes. To release those photos, the president has to weigh the possible consequences, which includes creating an image of martyrdom for terrorists everywhere to rally around. There is also the question of appropriateness. After all, the white house is not ogrish.com, it's a dignified institution that prefers not to broadcast gory details to the world that are upsetting or disturbing.

You're right, the government is not Ogrish.com- they are an organization structurally designed to service, cater, and care for the American people. It is not their job to baby us and worry about our sensitivity, it's their job to be open and sincere with us.

At 5/4/11 03:54 AM, Me-Patch wrote:

Nothing would satisfy OP. He made up his mind about this instantly. He's a 9/11 conspiracy junkie and a diluted fool.

Bullshit. Did I mention 9/11 a single time in either this or the original article? No. In fact I've already specifically stated what would satisfy me, it just needs to be done quickly. I understand that after a certain point there's nothing else they can do to try to convince us, but shit- they could at leasttry. You have to admit, they havenot.

At 5/4/11 03:59 AM, MuyBurrito wrote:

Osama, for that matter, is a fictional character.

Don't be an idiot.

[GameMasterShania]

At 5/4/11 03:21 AM, Sanch wrote: Obamas a pussy and doesnt want to piss off tose crazy muslims any more, especially considering how he's muslim himself.

they went batshit when salman rushdie drew mohammed in a newspaper, they'll go batshit over their equivalent of Abraham Lincoln shot being plastered on the inernet

Most Muslims HATE Osama. Know why? Commandment: "Thou shalt not kill" in the middle of their book.

[Me-Patch]

At 5/4/11 10:32 AM, PhoenixGodwin wrote:

At 5/4/11 03:54 AM, Me-Patch wrote:

Nothing would satisfy OP. He made up his mind about this instantly. He's a 9/11 conspiracy junkie and a diluted fool.

Bullshit. Did I mention 9/11 a single time in either this or the original article? No. In fact I've already specifically stated what would satisfy me, it just needs to be done quickly. I understand that after a certain point there's nothing else they can do to try to convince us, but shit- they could at leasttry. You have to admit, they havenot.

Here's how I know nothing will satisfy you:
"If this has been lied about, the only way we would ever know is by persistently investigating all relevant information (which I believe they'll give us on their own time, when they've had sufficient time to "engineer" the information to suit applicable needs)"
- from your first topic
Clearly whatever comes out, no matter how quickly, will just be dismissed by you as doctored.

As to 9/11, I'll admitt you've been wise enough to avoid my subtle attempts to subvert your argument by drawing out more of your paranoid fantasies.

[Children-in-Heat]

At 5/4/11 12:24 PM, GameMasterShania wrote:

At 5/4/11 03:21 AM, Sanch wrote: Obamas a pussy and doesnt want to piss off tose crazy muslims any more, especially considering how he's muslim himself.

they went batshit when salman rushdie drew mohammed in a newspaper, they'll go batshit over their equivalent of Abraham Lincoln shot being plastered on the inernet

Most Muslims HATE Osama. Know why? Commandment: "Thou shalt not kill" in the middle of their book.

They can't kill other muslims (there was some killed on 9/11 too). killing infidels is okay if they threaten you first. Lying to infidels is okay too. If they don't abide to that then they're not really following the word of allah.

[PhoenixGodwin]

At 5/4/11 05:40 AM, Painbringer wrote:

I'm ashamed of all you Newgrounders who don't care about the pics.

Time and time again we say to the OPs "pics or it never happened" but when it comes to the government, we simply take their word for it and move along.

Baaaah Baaaah

A bunch of sheep.

Goodnight.

A well founded sentiment.

At 5/4/11 12:24 PM, GameMasterShania wrote:

Most Muslims HATE Osama. Know why? Commandment: "Thou shalt not kill" in the middle of their book.

Thank you for not being an idiot.

According to this article

" The SEALs all got out of the downed helicopter and proceeded into the compound. As they swept through the property, they handcuffed those they encountered with plastic zip ties and pressed on in pursuit of their target, code-named Geronimo. Many SEAL team members carry helmet-mounted cameras, but the video beamed back to Washington did not show the fateful showdown with bin Laden, officials said. "

How disgustingly convenient.

[PhoenixGodwin]

At 5/4/11 12:40 PM, Me-Patch wrote:

At 5/4/11 10:32 AM, PhoenixGodwin wrote:

At 5/4/11 03:54 AM, Me-Patch wrote:

Nothing would satisfy OP. He made up his mind about this instantly. He's a 9/11 conspiracy junkie and a diluted fool.

Bullshit. Did I mention 9/11 a single time in either this or the original article? No. In fact I've already specifically stated what would satisfy me, it just needs to be done quickly. I understand that after a certain point there's nothing else they can do to try to convince us, but shit- they could at leasttry. You have to admit, they havenot.

Here's how I know nothing will satisfy you:
"If this has been lied about, the only way we would ever know is by persistently investigating all relevant information (which I believe they'll give us on their own time, when they've had sufficient time to "engineer" the information to suit applicable needs)"
- from your first topic
Clearly whatever comes out, no matter how quickly, will just be dismissed by you as doctored.

As to 9/11, I'll admitt you've been wise enough to avoid my subtle attempts to subvert your argument by drawing out more of your paranoid fantasies.

You are absolutely missing the point. I am not directly inferring any sort of conspiracy. I am only angry that the government is not being open and honest with us. Like I said before "I understand that after a certain point there's nothing else they can do to try to convince us, but shit- they could at least try. You have to admit, they have not."

Sorry for double post.

[megakill]

Shouldnt everyone be somewhat more concerned with the fact that they even killed him in the first place?

I mean look, you've got public enemy number one surround by a team of Navy Seals. As far as I'm aware, he wasnt armed (correct me if I'm wrong), so what do they do? Kill him for resisting.

Is it just me, or would that be a huge error in judgement? You've got the leader of a terrorist organization on a plate. Bring him in for interrogation! Even if he was armed, if not one person on that team could perform a neutralizing shot to disarm him in the space of a bedroom, a target that couldn't possibly be more than a few feet away, then what the fuck is all that training for?

So, yeah, they had a great chance to capture him and learn valuable information about his whole organization, and instead, they just kill him.

Great job.

[Me-Patch]

At 5/4/11 01:04 PM, PhoenixGodwin wrote: You are absolutely missing the point. I am not directly inferring any sort of conspiracy.

Yes you are. Mere hours after the news broke you posted a thread about it being an engineered media event, a thread that you claimed took hours of research. To me that's a pretty good indicator of your immediate reaction.

I am only angry that the government is not being open and honest with us. Like I said before "I understand that after a certain point there's nothing else they can do to try to convince us, but shit- they could at least try. You have to admit, they have not."

How quickly can you possibly expect the government to make definitive proof available to every Tom Dick and Larry on the planet? They're dealing with an incredibly sensitive situation and material. That's not to say you don't have every right to demand proof, that part of your argument I agree with, but I'm willing to wait for it before jumping to ridiculous conclusions. Just because they didn't put his head on a pike out front of the White House does not mean that they're lying to us.

[Bolo]

At 5/4/11 10:32 AM, PhoenixGodwin wrote: You're right, the government is not Ogrish.com- they are an organization structurally designed to service, cater, and care for the American people. It is not their job to baby us and worry about our sensitivity, it's their job to be open and sincere with us.

No, they are an organization structurally designed to protect and carry out the best interests of the American people, running infrastructure and conducting relations with other countries. If they believe that it is against the best interests of the American people to release photos that could possibly spawn terrorist attacks against the US, or disturb US citizens by gruesome imagery, then it is their prerogative to either release the photos or not. Satisfying the whims of conspiracy theorists who do not believe the government's account is not carrying out the best interests of the American people.

[Syztm]

Well, no photo's for you. Conspiracy theorists, eat your heart out.

[PhoenixGodwin]

At 5/4/11 01:22 PM, Me-Patch wrote:

Yes you are. Mere hours after the news broke you posted a thread about it being an engineered media event, a thread that you claimed took hours of research. To me that's a pretty good indicator of your immediate reaction.

Of course you realize, that by "mere hours" you mean 10. It took ten hours of constant research, writing, and checking for new updates to put that article together.

I used the word "engineered" as a means to attract people's attention to the article, but then I clarified in the article itself that I meant deliberated, not falsified. The two do not have to go hand in hand by any means.

How quickly can you possibly expect the government to make definitive proof available to every Tom Dick and Larry on the planet? They're dealing with an incredibly sensitive situation and material. That's not to say you don't have every right to demand proof, that part of your argument I agree with, but I'm willing to wait for it before jumping to ridiculous conclusions. Just because they didn't put his head on a pike out front of the White House does not mean that they're lying to us.

Uh... instantly? This is the age of the internet. Posting digital information on the internet can be and should have been done immediately following the announcement.

I'm not jumping to any ridiculous conclusions and frankly you telling me my own intentions is tiring. I feel confident that Bin Laden is dead. The rest is up in the air because no proof has been provided. The longer they wait to produce it the less likely people are going to believe it. I feel they should know this as well and either they are hiding something, or they just don't care enough about how much The People trust them. Neither of these is acceptable in my opinion and that is my only point. I am not implying a conspiracy, I am implying a lack of Truth.

At 5/4/11 01:31 PM, Bolo wrote:

No, they are an organization structurally designed to protect and carry out the best interests of the American people, running infrastructure and conducting relations with other countries. If they believe that it is against the best interests of the American people to release photos that could possibly spawn terrorist attacks against the US, or disturb US citizens by gruesome imagery, then it is their prerogative to either release the photos or not. Satisfying the whims of conspiracy theorists who do not believe the government's account is not carrying out the best interests of the American people.

I don't think that that's an entirely invalid argument, but I don't think the government is truly worried about retaliation to that extent. We've always been on some sort of "terror-alert" since late 2001, I don't think proving the fact that we killed him (when it's already known he's dead) will create a sudden lapse in our defensive capabilities. I think The Truth is more important than fear-mongering.

[Me-Patch]

At 5/4/11 01:53 PM, PhoenixGodwin wrote:

At 5/4/11 01:22 PM, Me-Patch wrote:

Yes you are. Mere hours after the news broke you posted a thread about it being an engineered media event, a thread that you claimed took hours of research. To me that's a pretty good indicator of your immediate reaction.

Of course you realize, that by "mere hours" you mean 10. It took ten hours of constant research, writing, and checking for new updates to put that article together.

So by your own admission the second you heard about it you set to work at compartmentalizing it to fit into your warped view of the world. And so what if it took ten hours, you're just a slow propagandist.

I used the word "engineered" as a means to attract people's attention to the article, but then I clarified in the article itself that I meant deliberated, not falsified. The two do not have to go hand in hand by any means.

Well no shit it was deliberated, it was on the news. Everything on the news is deliberately presented to us in some way. This thread is deliberately full of subtext.

How quickly can you possibly expect the government to make definitive proof available to every Tom Dick and Larry on the planet? They're dealing with an incredibly sensitive situation and material. That's not to say you don't have every right to demand proof, that part of your argument I agree with, but I'm willing to wait for it before jumping to ridiculous conclusions. Just because they didn't put his head on a pike out front of the White House does not mean that they're lying to us.

Uh... instantly? This is the age of the internet. Posting digital information on the internet can be and should have been done immediately following the announcement.

It's not a matter of what's possible it's a matter of what's sensible. From the link posted earlier in this thread - "Rogers argued that conspiracy theorists will never be satisfied anyway, telling Fox News that releasing the picture could make things more difficult for soldiers in the field without dispelling the bin Laden myths." Well put.

I also liked Bolo's message on that point quite a bit.

I'm not jumping to any ridiculous conclusions and frankly you telling me my own intentions is tiring. I feel confident that Bin Laden is dead. The rest is up in the air because no proof has been provided. The longer they wait to produce it the less likely people are going to believe it. I feel they should know this as well and either they are hiding something, or they just don't care enough about how much The People trust them. Neither of these is acceptable in my opinion and that is my only point. I am not implying a conspiracy, I am implying a lack of Truth.

You're implying that the government is conspiring to hide the truth from us, but you're not implying a conspiracy? Frankly I'm getting tired of this too.

[PhoenixGodwin]

At 5/4/11 02:17 PM, Me-Patch wrote:

So by your own admission the second you heard about it you set to work at compartmentalizing it to fit into your warped view of the world. And so what if it took ten hours, you're just a slow propagandist.

Do you even recognize the own shit spewing from your mouth? You keep accusing me of being a propagandist when I have said time and time again that my only issue- since the beginning- is the lack of Truth. My only intention has been to bring attention to the fact that the government is not giving us any evidence. I am not implying the reason why, I am implying that I have a serious problem with that in itself. That is it. No more- no less. To infer extra meaning besides that is asinine and redundant.

Well no shit it was deliberated, it was on the news. Everything on the news is deliberately presented to us in some way. This thread is deliberately full of subtext.

Good, so now you understand what I meant when I said "engineered". What's the problem here?

It's not a matter of what's possible it's a matter of what's sensible. From the link posted earlier in this thread - "Rogers argued that conspiracy theorists will never be satisfied anyway, telling Fox News that releasing the picture could make things more difficult for soldiers in the field without dispelling the bin Laden myths." Well put.

Any rational reasons as to how that would be possible? I would like to know them and I would not discount any reasonable arguments toward that case.

You're implying that the government is conspiring to hide the truth from us, but you're not implying a conspiracy? Frankly I'm getting tired of this too.

It's obvious that the government is hiding the truth from us. "Truth" here meaning: Photos, video, REAL. FUCKING. EVIDENCE. They say they have it and they are not giving it to us. That's not a conspiracy, Obama has openly announced he won't be releasing photos.

If you want to call that a conspiracy that's your own misguided semantics, but stop making me say over and over again that I am not implying a conspiracy- only a lack of truth.

[Me-Patch]

nullAt 5/4/11 02:33 PM, PhoenixGodwin wrote:

At 5/4/11 02:17 PM, Me-Patch wrote:

So by your own admission the second you heard about it you set to work at compartmentalizing it to fit into your warped view of the world. And so what if it took ten hours, you're just a slow propagandist.

Do you even recognize the own shit spewing from your mouth? You keep accusing me of being a propagandist when I have said time and time again that my only issue- since the beginning- is the lack of Truth. My only intention has been to bring attention to the fact that the government is not giving us any evidence. I am not implying the reason why, I am implying that I have a serious problem with that in itself. That is it. No more- no less. To infer extra meaning besides that is asinine and redundant.

The shit spewing from my mouth, that's a laugh coming from you. And yeah, all you want is a picture and all your diluted fantasies will go away. Do you really expect anyone to believe that all of this research and work you've put into this boils down to nothing more than your disappointment that bureaucracy is slow?

Well no shit it was deliberated, it was on the news. Everything on the news is deliberately presented to us in some way. This thread is deliberately full of subtext.

Good, so now you understand what I meant when I said "engineered". What's the problem here?

Do you realize what I meant when I said "subtext". That just because you're not screaming conspiracy it's obvious that that's your point.

It's not a matter of what's possible it's a matter of what's sensible. From the link posted earlier in this thread - "Rogers argued that conspiracy theorists will never be satisfied anyway, telling Fox News that releasing the picture could make things more difficult for soldiers in the field without dispelling the bin Laden myths." Well put.

Any rational reasons as to how that would be possible? I would like to know them and I would not discount any reasonable arguments toward that case.

How what would be possible? A picture of the worlds most renowned terrorist post-martyrdom might might piss off or frighten other muslims? Think about it.

You're implying that the government is conspiring to hide the truth from us, but you're not implying a conspiracy? Frankly I'm getting tired of this too.

It's obvious that the government is hiding the truth from us. "Truth" here meaning: Photos, video, REAL. FUCKING. EVIDENCE. They say they have it and they are not giving it to us. That's not a conspiracy, Obama has openly announced he won't be releasing photos.

Not releasing a picture isn't the same as hiding the truth. I'm much more interested in the DNA evidence that I'm sure you're going to call doctored.

If you want to call that a conspiracy that's your own misguided semantics, but stop making me say over and over again that I am not implying a conspiracy- only a lack of truth.

"Most likely Osama is dead. Either that or or he's fine but in a situation where if all goes well no one who matters will ever see or hear from him again." - sounds like a conspiracy theory to me

[Randomguy78]

At 5/4/11 03:59 AM, MuyBurrito wrote: Osama, for that matter, is a fictional character. He's a scapegoat for the actions of the Bush Administration. Their fairy tale was handed over to the Democrats in the 2008 election, and those Democrats kept playing this never ending game.

how original and unfunny

[PhoenixGodwin]

At 5/4/11 03:05 PM, Me-Patch wrote:

The shit spewing from my mouth, that's a laugh coming from you. And yeah, all you want is a picture and all your diluted fantasies will go away. Do you really expect anyone to believe that all of this research and work you've put into this boils down to nothing more than your disappointment that bureaucracy is slow?

Do you realize what I meant when I said "subtext". That just because you're not screaming conspiracy it's obvious that that's your point.

If I wanted to get another point acrossI would have fucking said it. It's not about them being slow, it's about them withholding information from us . I didn't even say all that I wanted was a picture. You're spin is constructed even more poorly than that of O' Reilly or Beck (but you sound like one of them, nonetheless).

How what would be possible? A picture of the worlds most renowned terrorist post-martyrdom might might piss off or frighten other muslims? Think about it.

I don't consider that a substantial argument because after we killed Abu al-Zarqawi Pictures of him post-mortem were released

I'm much more interested in the DNA evidence that I'm sure you're going to call doctored.

Well of course. Where's the logic in saying "They've withheld a bunch of evidence. They said they did a DNA test before they dumped the body in the ocean for questionably valid reasons, and at some point they provided a document saying 'Yep, it was him alright!' So now we feel satisfied that we've been given substantial proof"

"Most likely Osama is dead. Either that or or he's fine but in a situation where if all goes well no one who matters will ever see or hear from him again." - sounds like a conspiracy theory to me

You obviously know little about journalism. All I did was concede that that was a possibility, but I quickly waved it off as useless and rhetorical and you are spinning my own words to make my own fucking articles be about something they are not.

All you are doing is telling me what my intentions are- but it's so misguided and wrong I can't help but wonder why you would so dogmatically attempt to do so. I have said over and over again what my intentions truly are and between us the only one who has been mentioning conspiracy over and over again is you.

[Me-Patch]

At 5/4/11 03:37 PM, PhoenixGodwin wrote:

At 5/4/11 03:05 PM, Me-Patch wrote:

The shit spewing from my mouth, that's a laugh coming from you. And yeah, all you want is a picture and all your diluted fantasies will go away. Do you really expect anyone to believe that all of this research and work you've put into this boils down to nothing more than your disappointment that bureaucracy is slow?

Do you realize what I meant when I said "subtext". That just because you're not screaming conspiracy it's obvious that that's your point.

If I wanted to get another point acrossI would have fucking said it. It's not about them being slow, it's about them withholding information from us . I didn't even say all that I wanted was a picture. You're spin is constructed even more poorly than that of O' Reilly or Beck (but you sound like one of them, nonetheless).

And your spin is like the loose change kid only without the balls to actually come out and say what you think. Who do you think you're fucking fooling? You obviously want to convey the message that the government is trying to make us believe something that is not true, so why don't you stop being a pussy and just say it.

How what would be possible? A picture of the worlds most renowned terrorist post-martyrdom might might piss off or frighten other muslims? Think about it.

I don't consider that a substantial argument because after we killed Abu al-Zarqawi Pictures of him post-mortem were released

Osama has alot more brand recognition than Al-Zarqawi, and it's not like a picture is going to change your mind.

I'm much more interested in the DNA evidence that I'm sure you're going to call doctored.

Well of course. Where's the logic in saying "They've withheld a bunch of evidence. They said they did a DNA test before they dumped the body in the ocean for questionably valid reasons, and at some point they provided a document saying 'Yep, it was him alright!' So now we feel satisfied that we've been given substantial proof"

And a picture is going to change your opinion? You twist every detail with a tone of dishonesty. Who do you think you're fucking fooling? Your mind is firmly made up and has been from the start. Nothing will satisfy you.

"Most likely Osama is dead. Either that or or he's fine but in a situation where if all goes well no one who matters will ever see or hear from him again." - sounds like a conspiracy theory to me

You obviously know little about journalism. All I did was concede that that was a possibility, but I quickly waved it off as useless and rhetorical and you are spinning my own words to make my own fucking articles be about something they are not.

You didn't concede it, you proposed it. And you didn't wave it off either. Talk about my spin? You've spun this so much that you don't even have a point anymore other than 'Where's the picture', which doesn't even matter anyway.

All you are doing is telling me what my intentions are- but it's so misguided and wrong I can't help but wonder why you would so dogmatically attempt to do so. I have said over and over again what my intentions truly are and between us the only one who has been mentioning conspiracy over and over again is you.

What are your intentions? To spread fear and paranoia. Who do you think you're fucking fooling?