Birthers become 'Deathers'

Recommended Videos

artanis_neravar

New member
Apr 18, 2011
2,560
0
0
arbane said:
OP: It's pretty straightforward. The Birthers have a lot of emotions invested in the idea that Obama is PURE EVIL. Therefore, he CAN'T have done anything they might approve of, so it MUST be an EVIL TRICK in the service of his muslimofascist agenda.

artanis_neravar said:
Ewyx said:
I believe that this whole business is going to be a major vote draw, and the timing is kinda funny. However, I don't think there's a conspiracy, a lot of funny coincidences at best. Though I hate that we're not given any information about it, like why was his wife shot in the leg (unarmed), why was Osama killed (unarmed), well that actually makes it into an execution. Why didn't they bring him to court etc.
If we gave him a trial than he would have a podium to spew his anti-west rhetoric and incite more people against us
So what? Even the NAZIS (at least the ones who didn't wuss out and kill themselves) got trials.
The Nazis had already lost, they had no support and everyone hated them (or at least they had no support in places that could benefit them). Bin Laden has plenty of people who still support him, people who are in a position to do something about it
 

artanis_neravar

New member
Apr 18, 2011
2,560
0
0
Ewyx said:
artanis_neravar said:
If we gave him a trial than he would have a podium to spew his anti-west rhetoric and incite more people against us
so? What you're saying is, freedom of speech, as long as you agree with it right? Also, everyone has the right to a fair trial, except if you don't like them...

Yeah... core values huh?
Freedom of speech, unless you are a terrorist who's whole purpose in life is to kill American citizens, yes.
 

Altorin

Jack of No Trades
May 16, 2008
6,976
0
0
arbane said:
Altorin said:
When my girlfriend first heard about bin laden, she said "I'll only believe it when I see pictures."

I just looked at her cockeyed and said "uhhh, k".

Sometimes I hate my girlfriend.
I hope the sex is good, at least.
Oh it is, and really, I do love her, but sometimes she says things without thinking that just seem... wrong. She also assumed that McCain would win because he was an old white guy not a young black guy. That really upset me for some reason.

She's not racist really... just... not too smart when it comes to that sort of thing.
 

Char-Nobyl

New member
May 8, 2009
784
0
0
Therumancer said:
See, this right here is what derails these discussions. You can't make a valid arguement, so you have to start getting into absurdities. There is a big differance between every person having to be present, and having something like a body being made public.
You implied that no evidence was sufficient except actually seeing firsthand what was being claimed. In the case of Osama bin Laden, that would be seeing his corpse. In the case of the moon landings, by your own logic, it would be ferrying people to the moon.

Therumancer said:
Things like Muslim burial policies are irrelevent to the situation because the US is not only not a Muslim nation, but we have a seperation of Church and State.
We allow churches to be exempt from taxes, have federal holidays for religious holy days, etc. We seem to hold religion in pretty high esteem here in America, in case you haven't noticed. And even if we didn't, telling strategically important nations who do value religion where they can shove their superstitious mumbo-jumbo doesn't seem like a very good foreign policy plan.

Then again, you're building a nice resume of hilariously bad government policies. This is mostly the norm from you.

Therumancer said:
Religion and spirituality do not influance our policies.
Pffftt...HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA! Oh, God, that's too much, man. That's too much. I can barely breathe here.

Therumancer said:
In a case like this where our best interests are served by NOT following the customs of another nation, we don't do it, we follow our own policies and customs. Argueing that we did this for diplomatic reasons is nothing but an excuse, and if true is another point in the "Obama is a moron" column if he had the body and disposed of it for this reason.
So...because Obama most likely prevented a vindictive bombing campaign by Al Qaeda and simultaneously prevented problems with the various Muslim nations we maintain often strained relationships (seeing as we'd be spitting on their faith), he's a moron. Again: Riiiiiiiight.

Therumancer said:
I get it, you don't like the points I'm making, that's fine, but there is no real way to talk around them. The bottom line always come back to what's actually happened. Obama brought the conspiricy theories on himself when he destroyed the body, he has absolutly no way of providing proof that he didn't make this up. He could have had proof if he had held onto the body, but he didn't... and of course, all the reasons for why he should have held onto the body provide the sparks for people to claim that we never "got" Bin Ladin.
On the contrary, there's plenty of evidence. There's DNA tests, the testimony of SEAL Team 6, the officers involved, the officials involved, the remains of the helicopter they used, the confirmation of his death from Al Qaeda...the list goes on.

The funniest part, though, is that you seem to think that the only valid evidence of the kill is seeing Osama's corpse first hand, dismissing that after that everyone would believe he was dead except for the crazies who thought he'd been "cloned" or something (your example, too). Even better? There are plenty of ways to falsify a body. Saddam Hussein had dozens of body doubles, virtually of of whom were indistinguishable from him. And the surgery that produces them is so simple that conspiracy theorists would sprout a massive hard-on for it as soon as they saw the corpse. "That's no bullet scar! That's a surgery mark! THIS ISN'T HIM!"

Therumancer said:
Now understand, just because we didn't get Bin Ladin doesn't mean he isn't dead. I suspect he is, because Obama wouldn't risk the guy popping up just to mess with the US. He doubtlessly is Dead, but due to the way Barry handled this it will remain open to speculation as to whether we had anything to do with it, and of course Barry wants to take credit for it given the upcoming election.
Wow. That's a bit surprising. In spite of the fact that there is zero evidence to your "Osama's probably been dead for a while" theory, you offhandedly classify it as common sense, while denying the existence of the mountain of evidence suggesting that he was alive until we killed him a few days ago.
 

Ensiferum

New member
Apr 24, 2010
587
0
0
I don't question whether Bin Laden is dead; I believe with full certainty that he is. What I question is the reasoning behind keeping the evidence from the American people. Two of the biggest reasons The White House says it won't release the photograph is either A: they're afraid it will be too shocking for the American public, or B: that it will spark further unrest from terrorist groups. In response to A; the American public has the right to judge for themselves whether or not they want to view something potentially disturbing or offensive. Most of us still remember the images of people jumping from the World Trade Center on 9/11 and we wanted that image burned into our minds so that we never forget. A picture of Osama's body has similar connotations; I don't want to see it out of some deranged blood-lust, rather I want to see it because I want to see justice and closure for the families of the people we lost on that awful day which happened not even a decade ago. As for B: Frankly any terrorist group will already be deranged enough to rally as it is; a picture of a dead body won't make much of a difference there.

Speaking for Americans, our government is beholden to and works for US, not the other way around. Washington and especially the Obama administration needs to be reminded that it's "We the People" who they're working for and they don't have the right to treat us like children in choosing what is or isn't "appropriate" for us to see.
 

Hatter

New member
Dec 12, 2010
81
0
0
Stammer said:
They were stupid when they were "birthers" and now they're just as stupid as "deathers".

Why can't people ever just accept news as the truth? Why do people always have to question every little thing? (lol, says the person asking all the questions)
Well the news/media in general is usually not the greatest source of information. A damn good amount of what was said on all major news channels that I saw regarding the operation itself (and what is currently being said all over no doubt due in part to what was reported)were... misinformed at the very least. However it's very disappointing to hear that there's so many people that think they can't trust their govt. Really the only shred of reasoning that they have to believe that the U.S. government is lying are other older conspiracy theories that hold just as much logic behind them.
Fact is, he's dead. Photo's aren't needed to prove that. (Although I do believe that the photos should be released for various other reasons.)
 

artanis_neravar

New member
Apr 18, 2011
2,560
0
0
arbane said:
artanis_neravar said:
Ewyx said:
artanis_neravar said:
If we gave him a trial than he would have a podium to spew his anti-west rhetoric and incite more people against us
so? What you're saying is, freedom of speech, as long as you agree with it right? Also, everyone has the right to a fair trial, except if you don't like them...

Yeah... core values huh?
Freedom of speech, unless you are a terrorist who's whole purpose in life is to kill American citizens, yes.
Accused terrorist. Innocent until proven guilty, remember that outmoded idea?

Otherwise, you're just saying "I am totally happy giving the government the right to summarily kill or eternally imprison ANYONE, as long as they say the Magic Word 'Terrorist'." Which is generally something even the most authoritarian Big-Government Republican is not totally comfortable doing.
He himself claimed credit for 9/11, that is more than enough proof
 

BlackWidower

New member
Nov 16, 2009
783
0
0
They miss a big hole in their theory. If Osama is still alive, all he needs to do is send another VHS to Al Jazeera and the conspiracy is dead.
 

BlackWidower

New member
Nov 16, 2009
783
0
0
artanis_neravar said:
arbane said:
artanis_neravar said:
Ewyx said:
artanis_neravar said:
If we gave him a trial than he would have a podium to spew his anti-west rhetoric and incite more people against us
so? What you're saying is, freedom of speech, as long as you agree with it right? Also, everyone has the right to a fair trial, except if you don't like them...

Yeah... core values huh?
Freedom of speech, unless you are a terrorist who's whole purpose in life is to kill American citizens, yes.
Accused terrorist. Innocent until proven guilty, remember that outmoded idea?

Otherwise, you're just saying "I am totally happy giving the government the right to summarily kill or eternally imprison ANYONE, as long as they say the Magic Word 'Terrorist'." Which is generally something even the most authoritarian Big-Government Republican is not totally comfortable doing.
He himself claimed credit for 9/11, that is more than enough proof
You're right, that's what they call a confession, but if he asks for a trial, he should still get it. He's destined to lose, and it won't change a damn thing, but he should still get it.
 

artanis_neravar

New member
Apr 18, 2011
2,560
0
0
BlackWidower said:
artanis_neravar said:
arbane said:
artanis_neravar said:
Ewyx said:
artanis_neravar said:
If we gave him a trial than he would have a podium to spew his anti-west rhetoric and incite more people against us
so? What you're saying is, freedom of speech, as long as you agree with it right? Also, everyone has the right to a fair trial, except if you don't like them...

Yeah... core values huh?
Freedom of speech, unless you are a terrorist who's whole purpose in life is to kill American citizens, yes.
Accused terrorist. Innocent until proven guilty, remember that outmoded idea?

Otherwise, you're just saying "I am totally happy giving the government the right to summarily kill or eternally imprison ANYONE, as long as they say the Magic Word 'Terrorist'." Which is generally something even the most authoritarian Big-Government Republican is not totally comfortable doing.
He himself claimed credit for 9/11, that is more than enough proof
You're right, that's what they call a confession, but if he asks for a trial, he should still get it. He's destined to lose, and it won't change a damn thing, but he should still get it.
Chances are, he never asked but we may never know
 

BlackWidower

New member
Nov 16, 2009
783
0
0
artanis_neravar said:
BlackWidower said:
artanis_neravar said:
arbane said:
artanis_neravar said:
Ewyx said:
artanis_neravar said:
If we gave him a trial than he would have a podium to spew his anti-west rhetoric and incite more people against us
so? What you're saying is, freedom of speech, as long as you agree with it right? Also, everyone has the right to a fair trial, except if you don't like them...

Yeah... core values huh?
Freedom of speech, unless you are a terrorist who's whole purpose in life is to kill American citizens, yes.
Accused terrorist. Innocent until proven guilty, remember that outmoded idea?

Otherwise, you're just saying "I am totally happy giving the government the right to summarily kill or eternally imprison ANYONE, as long as they say the Magic Word 'Terrorist'." Which is generally something even the most authoritarian Big-Government Republican is not totally comfortable doing.
He himself claimed credit for 9/11, that is more than enough proof
You're right, that's what they call a confession, but if he asks for a trial, he should still get it. He's destined to lose, and it won't change a damn thing, but he should still get it.
Chances are, he never asked but we may never know
My biggest complaint is, he got off too easy. Death isn't severe enough a punishment for a bastard that big.
 

artanis_neravar

New member
Apr 18, 2011
2,560
0
0
BlackWidower said:
artanis_neravar said:
BlackWidower said:
artanis_neravar said:
arbane said:
artanis_neravar said:
Ewyx said:
artanis_neravar said:
If we gave him a trial than he would have a podium to spew his anti-west rhetoric and incite more people against us
so? What you're saying is, freedom of speech, as long as you agree with it right? Also, everyone has the right to a fair trial, except if you don't like them...

Yeah... core values huh?
Freedom of speech, unless you are a terrorist who's whole purpose in life is to kill American citizens, yes.
Accused terrorist. Innocent until proven guilty, remember that outmoded idea?

Otherwise, you're just saying "I am totally happy giving the government the right to summarily kill or eternally imprison ANYONE, as long as they say the Magic Word 'Terrorist'." Which is generally something even the most authoritarian Big-Government Republican is not totally comfortable doing.
He himself claimed credit for 9/11, that is more than enough proof
You're right, that's what they call a confession, but if he asks for a trial, he should still get it. He's destined to lose, and it won't change a damn thing, but he should still get it.
Chances are, he never asked but we may never know
My biggest complaint is, he got off too easy. Death isn't severe enough a punishment for a bastard that big.
This I agree wholeheartedly with. Don't know what should have been done but still
 

michiehoward

New member
Apr 18, 2010
731
0
0
Morons.
Retards.
Actually they give morons a bad name. Soon they'll be calling Jesse "the Bod" Ventura.


Canna I get a AMEN
 

blindthrall

New member
Oct 14, 2009
1,151
0
0
snark said:
Ewyx said:
artanis_neravar said:
What would the government gain by keeping Osama's death a secret for at most 3 years?
Election time begins now, and it'll draw a lot of votes Obamas way.
Wouldn't it make more sense to wait until, you know a week before the election when Obama would receive the biggest bounce in poll numbers as opposed to 18 months before the election?
Obvious troll would be obvious then. This is just enough time beforehand so he can't be accused of that, but was still the guy in charge when Osama went down. Not that I think that's the case, but that's the position of people who believe it.

The thing that bugs me about this is what I consider a legitimately shakey story being trumpeted as the absolute truth because the only alternative is both racist (birther) and idiotic (deather). Of course Osama's dead, but plenty of people around here seem pretty quick to believe anything the authorities say. Didn't they learn anything from Bush? The problem is a scarcity of options. UFOs are either aliens or swamp gas, no other possibility whatsoever, and don't you want to be over here, with the sane people? Same is going on with this ruckus to enforce conformity of opinion.
 

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,909
0
0
Char-Nobyl said:
Therumancer said:
See, this right here is what derails these discussions. You can't make a valid arguement, so you have to start getting into absurdities. There is a big differance between every person having to be present, and having something like a body being made public.
You implied that no evidence was sufficient except actually seeing firsthand what was being claimed. In the case of Osama bin Laden, that would be seeing his corpse. In the case of the moon landings, by your own logic, it would be ferrying people to the moon.

]
... and see, that right there is what invalidates your attempts to discuss the matter with me. Your being deliberatly absurd. The differance between having a body to do DNA tests on and ferrying people to the moon (which is inherantly impractical, where maintaining access to the body is not) is so ridiculous that it removes any validity from a position you try and argue, especially when it comes to you trying to project that onto someone else.

I am more than willing to discuss the topic, but only when people are willing to do so reasonably, and really you aren't. Whether you like what I have to say or not, I'm at least fairly respectful of the issues in question.
 

Speakercone

New member
May 21, 2010
480
0
0
Ah conspiracy nuts. They'll apply brutal skepticism to everything but their own established beliefs about how the world works.
 

artanis_neravar

New member
Apr 18, 2011
2,560
0
0
Therumancer said:
Char-Nobyl said:
Therumancer said:
See, this right here is what derails these discussions. You can't make a valid arguement, so you have to start getting into absurdities. There is a big differance between every person having to be present, and having something like a body being made public.
You implied that no evidence was sufficient except actually seeing firsthand what was being claimed. In the case of Osama bin Laden, that would be seeing his corpse. In the case of the moon landings, by your own logic, it would be ferrying people to the moon.

]
... and see, that right there is what invalidates your attempts to discuss the matter with me. Your being deliberatly absurd. The differance between having a body to do DNA tests on and ferrying people to the moon (which is inherantly impractical, where maintaining access to the body is not) is so ridiculous that it removes any validity from a position you try and argue, especially when it comes to you trying to project that onto someone else.

I am more than willing to discuss the topic, but only when people are willing to do so reasonably, and really you aren't. Whether you like what I have to say or not, I'm at least fairly respectful of the issues in question.
You are the one who brought up the moon landing comparison