Did U.S. Chop Up al Qaeda Boss With Terrifying Top Secret Spinning Blades?

What seems unbelievable? They probably have his DNA if he's been arrested previously. They can also match it to known relatives and sometimes exhuming bodies (like for cold case files).

My aunt does that kind of work. It's amazing how far that field has advanced. It's been used in several cases that exonerated a falsely convicted person and gained their release and pardon. Another aunt used to scare us as kids and told us the government has a file on EVERYBODY.

 

I know you're very happy believing Joe Biden. If you're happy, I'm happy.

 

If you think that entire departments cannot deceive, you apparently know nothing about The Pentagon Papers, the much later Afghanistan Papers, NIST reports about 911, and the FBI concocted fantasy about TWA800.

But if you're happy, I'm happy.

 

You're probably right. Everybody knows the government would never deceive, especially Sleepy Joe.

I will sleep better tonight knowing that my government would never lie to me.

 

Is anybody really sane?

You sound very well versed in government talking points. Very well indoctrinated, if you will.

 

And Lew Rockwell? We all have the free agency to deceive, and the imperfection by which to be deceived. But that doesn't make everyone either a liar or a victim. There is also truth.

 

Would you rather be chopped into micro-sushi than have your family die with you?

 

It's funny. I read your name as Chorizo. Appropriate for a dicing analogy isn't it?

 

Above all there is truth, at least in my opinion.

The trouble with truth is that, when it comes to politics especially, the truth is often unbearable, very unpleasant. That's why so many folks would rather not hear the truth, never discuss the truth, and often deny the truth.

 

Agreed.

 

I think matching DNA is quick. They could get it from anywhere, a hair brush, his limosine.

However, this would arguably need to have been done prior to the bombing so as to match the DNA with the person.

I'm sure they have surveillance photos and footage of the assassination.

 

Yes, I'm sure they have such photos, and they have been declared Top Secret, not for the public eyes.

Luckily in the Abbottabad Scam, our trusted White House staff were "allowed" to watch "the events" on a TV that nobody else could see. They told us what happened, and of course we believe them, knowing them all to be of high moral character.

 

I would imagine they have had a sample of his DNA for a very long time.

 

What a load of BS. LOL!

 

Where's Bin Laden? Been a little quiet of late?

 

If this link works for you, you will see the newspaper article in one of the regional newspapers back in December 2001. I think it's from an Egyptian paper.

News of Bin Laden's Death and Funeral - December 2001 | CLG News (legitgov.org)

 

Do you know that I am criticizing a Lew Rockwell publication?

 

Enjoy:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osama_bin_Laden_death_conspiracy_theories

 

Ordinarily I don't bother to read from Wikipedia when it is simply reinforcing an official conspiracy theory. OBL died in December 2001, and the CIA spends much energy publicizing government psychobabble by way of WP

Your offering more government psychobabble is not persuasive to me. The Legend of Abbottabad lives in your mind and many other minds, but I know it to be pure propaganda advancing certain political goals.

 

The important thing to remember is that if you want to take out terrorists, you need a Democrat.

Republican
Never sees 911 coming
Attacks wrong country
Never get Bin Laden

Democrat
Ends war in Iraq
Gets Bin Laden


Republican
Attacks former Miss America
Attacks Parents of Fallen Soldier
Attacks the CIA, the FBI, the generals he appoints...dead war heroes...his own staff

Democrat
Ends war in Afghanistan
Gets al-Zawahiri

 

Fantasy Land, here we go again.

 

That's a good question.

The answer is a bit involved for a casual forum.

 

Flaw #1, in your "argument:" you do not specify what you mean, by your charges. That is, no American leader struck a deal and cut through all the red tape, involved, to directly arm Al Qaeda, unless you intend to mean that it was done from this politician's own, personally owned firearms? Therefore, your casting of what occurred, the way you have, is already a lie, of sorts; it is your own interpretation, not a factual statement-- as you intend it to be used, in prosecuting your argument.

What I guess you are referring to, is Biden's sending our troops & weaponry to Afghanistan, and not having time to remove those weapons, before the Taliban took over the country. You could contend that Biden knew this would happen, but that is just your supposition, not a fact. Anyone who cannot differentiate between these two things, is no one to be trusted in laying out some test, of others' decency and trustworthiness.


Another problem with your first flaw, is that the Taliban and Al Qaeda are no longer aligned; in fact they are in conflict with one another. So you really should have been content with stating your assumed truth, as "arming the Taliban." Granted, since Afghanistan is not a tightly sealed region, Al Qaeda was also able to move in, and have possibly taken possession of some of these weapons. But to offer that "arming Al Qaeda," is the indisputably factual presentation of these events, seriously compromises your own credibility.


The same critique, could be applied to "supporting the 911 terrorists," but I am not even going to guess what you are alluding to, with that charge.



The second weakness in your argument (that is, its obvious vulnerability to counter-argument), is that Reagan unambiguously supplied arms to Iran, albeit surreptitiously, because he did it, in direct violation of U.S. law.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...oQFnoECAcQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0NcDBXfhhrSDV53BYQR8pQ


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.history.com/.amp/topics/1980s/iran-contra-affair


https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Contra_affair#:~:text=In%20violation%20of%20the%20Boland,they%20called%20%22the%20Enterprise%22.&ved=2ahUKEwjoj9XaxLL5AhXEg4kEHTEzALcQFnoECAQQBQ&usg=AOvVaw1ednVsnndYVOZgDHoKQyPq

This would be the argument in a partisan debate, meaning one between Dems & Republicans, but I believe that your own perspective is one which is condemning of simply all government & authority. So my adding the lies of Nixon-- or of Johnson's story (uncorrected, if he had merely been misinformed), about the Gulf of Tonkin incident, etc., etc.-- would be paralleling your intended indictment of Biden: would only be supplying you, with ammunition.

However, the conversation over the value of government, is a much broader, completely separate debate. Since your own perspective on this, is not the accepted reality, by people in general, it is disingenuous to use its framing, for judging anyone in that institution, which your philosophy rejects.



The third flaw, merely concerns spelling: "descent," refers to descending: going down, or deeper, into something; when you are trying to refer to behavior that is honorable, or at least approvable, the term you wish to employ is spelled: decent (as in decency).

 

If you wish to get your news from Egyptian classifieds, I'm happy for you.

 

What a pile of rambling nonsense .. name calling and strawman fallacy .. concurrent with falsehood.

Flaw #1, in your "argument:" you do not specify what you mean, by your charges. That is, no American leader struck a deal and cut through all the red tape, involved, to directly arm Al Qaeda, -

Who said "Directly ARM" ? and what a goofy weazle term to begin with .. as if indirectly arming Al Qaeda doesn't count equal measure.

Thought Bush said we are not only going after the terrorists.. but the supporters of terrorism .. did something change .. such that arming and funding 911 terrorist group through indirect means .. would not be supporting terrorism.

Strawman fallacy and falsehood .. right off the get go.

Coalition of 40 nations armed, supplied supported "Al Qaeda and Spawn" - Mother El Saud and Sunni Afilliates Qatar - Turkey leading the charge. Israel - Jordan and the West backing up the phlank -- France and the Brits -- CIA and MI6 - all happy to join in the party.

Didn't get the memo D ? never heard of no war in Syria nor Yemen I suppose

What did you figure that "Stop Arming Terrorist Act" was all about ? if not "Arming Terrorists" a bill cosponsored by 13 Bipartisan in Congress... 2017 .. what were those folks referring to .. folks you desperately want to call crazy .. loony toons .. who would say such a thing .. as your necessary illusions are challenged.

Sup mate -- having trouble comprehending the fact that Obama and Smokin Joe were arming the bad guys .. using them 911 terrorists as our new proxy army