~Shalhevet~ Posted May 2, 2011 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 334 Topics Per Day: 0.06 Content Count: 2,049 Content Per Day: 0.38 Reputation: 120 Days Won: 4 Joined: 08/13/2009 Status: Offline Share Posted May 2, 2011 Man, you're just kidding right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest man Posted May 2, 2011 Share Posted May 2, 2011 Man, you're just kidding right? No. Explain what you're talking about. You say the body needs to be brought forward and then mention 9/11 as a reason. I don't get it. The body is gone, it can't be brought forward and even if it could, what does 9/11 have to do with it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~Shalhevet~ Posted May 2, 2011 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 334 Topics Per Day: 0.06 Content Count: 2,049 Content Per Day: 0.38 Reputation: 120 Days Won: 4 Joined: 08/13/2009 Status: Offline Share Posted May 2, 2011 If a person commits a crime on US soil they are tried on US soil. He should not have been killed IMO if he was at all. He should have been brought to American soil and tried for the murders of 9/11, interrogated and executed swiftly. In the alternative his body should have been brought back to the US as evidence that he is in fact dead. Now we will never know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest man Posted May 2, 2011 Share Posted May 2, 2011 If a person commits a crime on US soil they are tried on US soil. He should not have been killed IMO if he was at all. He should have been brought to American soil and tried for the murders of 9/11, interrogated and executed swiftly. In the alternative his body should have been brought back to the US as evidence that he is in fact dead. Now we will never know. That's why the body was disposed of so quickly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SavedByGrace1981 Posted May 2, 2011 Group: Royal Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 104 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 2,923 Content Per Day: 0.61 Reputation: 462 Days Won: 2 Joined: 04/02/2011 Status: Offline Birthday: 03/22/1953 Share Posted May 2, 2011 Since it's extremely unlikely that any of us were members of the Special Forces unit that was involved in this mission, we should remember that everything we THINK we know about this comes from two sources: 1. The Government 2. The news media. Since the news media has become just a propoganda arm of the government (and not a watchdog, like it should be), do we really KNOW anything? Something to ponder. Blessings! -Ed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~Shalhevet~ Posted May 2, 2011 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 334 Topics Per Day: 0.06 Content Count: 2,049 Content Per Day: 0.38 Reputation: 120 Days Won: 4 Joined: 08/13/2009 Status: Offline Share Posted May 2, 2011 Are they going to release the name of the person(s) that pulled the trigger? Or is that confidential? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest man Posted May 2, 2011 Share Posted May 2, 2011 Are they going to release the name of the person(s) that pulled the trigger? Or is that confidential? That's not important and it would be extremely irresponsible if they did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez Posted May 2, 2011 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 683 Topics Per Day: 0.12 Content Count: 11,128 Content Per Day: 2.00 Reputation: 1,352 Days Won: 54 Joined: 02/03/2009 Status: Offline Birthday: 12/07/1952 Share Posted May 2, 2011 If a person commits a crime on US soil they are tried on US soil. He should not have been killed IMO if he was at all. He should have been brought to American soil and tried for the murders of 9/11, interrogated and executed swiftly. In the alternative his body should have been brought back to the US as evidence that he is in fact dead. Now we will never know. That's why the body was disposed of so quickly. I don't think your government would say he was dead if he was not. Think about it. What happens if he pops up in one of his video's holding the daily paper and saying " the reports of my death were greatly exaggerated" Why was it dumped at sea? Because, as would have been the case with Hitler had he been buried somewhere, the site would have become a shrine to every crazy lunatic out there. Why was he killed? Besides the fact that he deserved it, and it would have been the end result anyway, where would one keep him? And by keeping him anywhere he would have been a rallying point, and an icon for millions of people. The trial would nave been a media cicus that his organisation and others would have fed off for years. Throwing him overboard makes a statement that burying him on land could not. It is much more final, and his resting place will never be known. Psychologically this was a good move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldzimm Posted May 2, 2011 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 85 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 1,874 Content Per Day: 0.34 Reputation: 348 Days Won: 12 Joined: 03/10/2009 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/08/1955 Share Posted May 2, 2011 Osama Bin Laden should of been buried appropriately,(like it was posted before) wrapped in a pig skin and I might add, buried in a pig sty, what a great shrine for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest man Posted May 2, 2011 Share Posted May 2, 2011 I don't think your government would say he was dead if he was not. You mean like this thing with Obama's BC? Think about it. What happens if he pops up in one of his video's holding the daily paper and saying " the reports of my death were greatly exaggerated" I think he's been dead for some time. And there are reports that he had look-a-likes. Think of the possibilities. Psychologically this was a good move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.jpg.03b9a592ab3fbf402fba028ca0d40a97.thumb.jpg.2258d605d3ad1f34b6effde23d20e7d7.jpg)
Recommended Posts