Not releasing OSAMA Piks cuz of SENSITIVITY? WTF?
- Thread starter patlpp
- Start date
......
Well-Known Member
LaKapitone
Active Member
I'm not one who believes in every word from my Government, in fact, I'm the last... but in this particular case, Mr. Laden JUST died this past week, not during Bush's term, no cover-up, conspiracy, anything. Do I think the Government lies a lot? YES. But do I think they lie all the time? NO. That is how a 'realist' thinks, two sides to every story my friends.
IF........ Mr. Laden had died during Bush's term & he didn't want to end the war, blah blah blah... you don't think they would have taken photo's then? You don't think they cannot just take the date off or retouch the photo to match the date of now? Come on. They're not showing the photos because it is clearly to early to make that decision. Although we are patriots, we are not ANIMALS. We aren't going to drag his head behind a pickup truck down the Texas border. It's not happening. Sorry... but you have to use common-sense. Obama did not just buy himself another term, that is ludacris! This can in fact HURT Obama's next term... wtf. Not to mention, there is still Taliban terrorist running the streets that DO KNOW ENGLISH, you don't think they haven't heard about this? You don't think if it were a lie, they wouldn't or cannot easily leak that information? You don't think IF we had killed him during Bush's term, they would have ALREADY retaliated? I'm already awaiting a retaliation for his current death, let alone find out he was killed years ago & NONE OF HIS PEOPLE took a step forward? Come on.
Now we are in confrontation with Pakistan over information they may have withheld from us. IF..... we had killed Mr. Laden a long time ago, you don't think Pakistan would be kind of pissed right now were making obvious false accusations about not only they're country, but military & whatever 'Government' they currently have? COME ON! This may hurt Obama's term because a terrorist attack may be coming now, as a President you have to think about that before you act. IS IT a smart idea to release photos & BRAG about the death of one of the largest TERRORIST GROUPS IN THE WORLDS LEADER? That's almost ASKING to be hit. To make that decision, your taking a huge chance at a war or attack that could cost you your election.
There is no conspiracy here because the simple fact of the matter is... to many things point the other way. As for Obama's certificate, unless I am unaware, but didn't they release that already a few weeks ago?
IF........ Mr. Laden had died during Bush's term & he didn't want to end the war, blah blah blah... you don't think they would have taken photo's then? You don't think they cannot just take the date off or retouch the photo to match the date of now? Come on. They're not showing the photos because it is clearly to early to make that decision. Although we are patriots, we are not ANIMALS. We aren't going to drag his head behind a pickup truck down the Texas border. It's not happening. Sorry... but you have to use common-sense. Obama did not just buy himself another term, that is ludacris! This can in fact HURT Obama's next term... wtf. Not to mention, there is still Taliban terrorist running the streets that DO KNOW ENGLISH, you don't think they haven't heard about this? You don't think if it were a lie, they wouldn't or cannot easily leak that information? You don't think IF we had killed him during Bush's term, they would have ALREADY retaliated? I'm already awaiting a retaliation for his current death, let alone find out he was killed years ago & NONE OF HIS PEOPLE took a step forward? Come on.
Now we are in confrontation with Pakistan over information they may have withheld from us. IF..... we had killed Mr. Laden a long time ago, you don't think Pakistan would be kind of pissed right now were making obvious false accusations about not only they're country, but military & whatever 'Government' they currently have? COME ON! This may hurt Obama's term because a terrorist attack may be coming now, as a President you have to think about that before you act. IS IT a smart idea to release photos & BRAG about the death of one of the largest TERRORIST GROUPS IN THE WORLDS LEADER? That's almost ASKING to be hit. To make that decision, your taking a huge chance at a war or attack that could cost you your election.
There is no conspiracy here because the simple fact of the matter is... to many things point the other way. As for Obama's certificate, unless I am unaware, but didn't they release that already a few weeks ago?
Total Head
Well-Known Member
mr. laden? wtf? the government has actually said not to search for pictures online because "they are fake and you will get a virus". if in fact the pictures were leaked/real the gov would have some explaining to do. are you really suggesting that we cower to terrorists so we "don't get hit again"? fuck el queso or whatever the fuck those cunts call themselves. pics or it didn't happen. the whole thing is fishy.
LaKapitone
Active Member
He was a male, yes? So, Mr. Laden. It's a figure of speech dude, lmao. Half of your post I cannot make sense of, but I will try to respond.
#1. The videos/pics online that contain images of Bin Laden have shown that 7-10 clicks are virus, trojan, worm, etc. conducted by Google. So, are you telling me Google is in on this too? Should we not use Google, omg!? Come on. 70% of the images/videos are fake & lead to a virus, that is a statistic, by one of the, if not 'the' - leading online fucking corporation, Google.
#2. No, I am not suggesting we cower to terrorist. I am suggesting that it would be 'stupid' to brag, boast, & cheer about the death of a terrorist group (the largest terrorist groups) leader. Don't you think? They are willing to give they're life to kill Americans, they were trained from infants this way, brainwashed, a cult. Do you not know what the fuck that means? That means, that if we release a stupid fucking photo for people like 'you' to be 'satisfied' so you can jerk off to it to bed at night... an the backlash is pissing off the group so much they attack LA, NY again, or some other major city... is not worth your right-hand cupping a handful of jizz. Sorry.
#3. Your a typical, no... rephrase, you fit the stereotypical - there we go - stoner. You think everything the Government does is false. But then, your probably also the same asshole that preaches "innocent till proven guilty, not the other way around" yet, your calling the Government guilty till proven innocent. The Government does not have to release photos to you of the death, especially if it could potentially harm our country, or create further conflict, maybe even kill someone's father, mother, daughter, or brother, so they can 'prove' they killed someone that you never even fucking knew.
Do you want a photo of every militant we killed in the past 5 years to prove we are in Iraq? Idiot.
#4. Pics or it didn't happen? Dude, what are you smoking? Not weed. I already said this in another thread, HOW EASY would it be for ME or YOU or ANYONE on RIU to Photoshop a pic of MR. LADEN dead? How easy? I know I could. So, if I could, I know that the Government could hire someone 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times better then me at photo editing. So what next? If they provide a photo, an it doesn't look the way you want it to, are you going to cry wolf again & say it's a fake photo? Now you want evidence of who made the fake photo? Shit, shut up.
There is no conspiracy, that's the most idiotic thing I ever heard. 9-11, now there is a conspiracy, go waste your time researching that, at least that has hopes of being something other then what it appears. But by Laden dying, it's exactly as it appears, whether I can see it or not. I don't have to see shit to believe it, I'm not that much of a fucking 5-year old.
LMAO @ how easy it would be for the Gov. to produce a photo for all you crying asses... an the photo wouldn't even have to be real. But to you fucks, it's 'evidence'! You would be a horrible lawyer.
Total Head
Well-Known Member
holy book. jesus. "mister" is a title of respect and as such is completely inappropriate when referring to a terrorist. i never claimed there was a conspiracy so the last 8 thousand words of that post don't interest me, i just called the whole thing fishy. how you inferred "conspiracy" from that is beyond me. if some stranger's word is good enough for you after a 10 year manhunt then i want to know what YOU'RE smoking. i'm an idiot? the post to which you replied was completely coherent yet you could not make sense of it so you put at least 104955584 words in my mouth. and you're a poopy head.
djruiner
Well-Known Member
what i wonder is if the government had no issues with the media showing the hanging of saddam why is there an issue with bin ladens pictures. i saw first hand on local news saddam being hung, is this telling us the we are able to and let other countries see us kill their leader, just not show them after they are killed. thats like saying its ok to show the guy running around on fire, but don't show him after he is dead on the floor,that would be insensitive.but to me it don't really matter. my way of thinking is maybe had the CIA not funded and trained bin laden in the first place we would not be in this mess. what next, give a monkey poop and expect him not to fling it?
LaKapitone
Active Member
Poopy head? Okay. Nice.
Mister is a title of respect, I didn't know Laden personally, Hell how do you know he was even a terrorist & our Government wasn't feeding it to us? Lmao. (sarcasm...)
I can say Mr. because I never knew Laden to know if he was good or bad. Why is it okay to call our president Mr. if he is just as guilty? Because he is OUR president? What if I didn't vote for him... am I required to say Mr? Yes, I still am, because I do not know the president personally. But I can assure you he is as guilty as the dude I refer to as Mr. Laden. In what way is Bush not a murderer? Give me a break... the United State's military, an politicians are terrorist. That is a fact, they have killed just as many if not more then MR. LADEN.
So is it appropriate? Yes, it is appropriate, thank you.
"i never claimed there was a conspiracy" &"pics or it didn't happen. the whole thing is fishy." the reference "PICS OR IT DIDN'T HAPPEN" means you are making a claim that there is foul play in the story given to the public. The definition of ALL that........ would be conspiracy my friend, thanks.
"you put at least104955584 words in my mouth" I wrote as much as an article in the local paper, sorry that's to much? I read more then that on my front page news for Yahoo. ......An it's not the only thing I've put in your mouth. Lmao. Jk. =)
...Anything else?
Mister is a title of respect, I didn't know Laden personally, Hell how do you know he was even a terrorist & our Government wasn't feeding it to us? Lmao. (sarcasm...)
I can say Mr. because I never knew Laden to know if he was good or bad. Why is it okay to call our president Mr. if he is just as guilty? Because he is OUR president? What if I didn't vote for him... am I required to say Mr? Yes, I still am, because I do not know the president personally. But I can assure you he is as guilty as the dude I refer to as Mr. Laden. In what way is Bush not a murderer? Give me a break... the United State's military, an politicians are terrorist. That is a fact, they have killed just as many if not more then MR. LADEN.
So is it appropriate? Yes, it is appropriate, thank you.
"i never claimed there was a conspiracy" &"pics or it didn't happen. the whole thing is fishy." the reference "PICS OR IT DIDN'T HAPPEN" means you are making a claim that there is foul play in the story given to the public. The definition of ALL that........ would be conspiracy my friend, thanks.
"you put at least104955584 words in my mouth" I wrote as much as an article in the local paper, sorry that's to much? I read more then that on my front page news for Yahoo. ......An it's not the only thing I've put in your mouth. Lmao. Jk. =)
...Anything else?
LaKapitone
Active Member
I guess I said this on another thread... the Saddam clip was a 3rd party source, leaked online. Big difference, it wasn't directly linked from us. The politics of it makes sense, if you understand politics of things? Idk. So, in our eyes, it was okay to air the clip once it was leaked because it became public through another source therefore we cannot be held liable for RE.... yes RE-showing the clip.
Although to you & me it may be stupid for them to show the dude on fire but not dead, you also have to understand the current situation. When Bush was in office during Saddam, he was president, now Obama is, therefore the same decision isn't going to be made, different people, different views, different parties, different races for God's sake, different decision in the end, different president. That's why I don't understand everyone saying Saddam this & that, that was UNDER BUSH'S TERM not OBAMA. Politicians, although seem the same, are not.
djruiner
Well-Known Member
because im not speaking on the politics of it...and also let me say again i don't care if they show it or not. and at the same time i don't think the media should have played the Saddam video whether or not it was leaked. so im not speaking of Bush or Obama.im speaking of the desensitized people/media of this country and them choosing whats good for us and what isn't. i don't think things like this should be shown on local tv for any child to see, lets let them catch their horror shows at the movie theater with their 18 yr old uncle. but i think that people will want to see some proof,whether real or not, just for closer for some people.and thats what the internet is for.let adults view if wanted without children's eyes stumbling onto it.and i don't need to "understand the politics of things" as it comes to things that can easily be viewed by the public. politics should not be involved when it comes to showing death on national television. and people wonder why we are desensitized to the point of no one even helping a stranger in need because they can morally look the other way and not feel bad about it.
IregAt420
Active Member
La, I'm really starting to think your on a computer all day every day.
Every post I've seen is like reading a fuckin book....
I like you dude, I do...but your posts are so off putting. You seem smart, but dont boast it in post size.
Can you contain your opinion or at least summarize?
Every post I've seen is like reading a fuckin book....
I like you dude, I do...but your posts are so off putting. You seem smart, but dont boast it in post size.
Can you contain your opinion or at least summarize?
^thats what pissed me off enough to post MY opinion.
LaKapitone
Active Member
Lmao, why did that piss you off? I'm not on the computer all day, trust me, I'd have a higher post count. I type around 75wpm, so it's hardly anything to me. Sometimes I forget I'm on a stoner forum, reading to you dudes is like Hell. I'm also a writer, went to school for that shiit... so it's in my blood, what can I say? Mixing law school with writing, is bad. I've been a member since Jan. have under 100 post per-month, not bad... I think? That's like 3 post per-day... NOTHING. Lol.
EDIT: The way I've always been taught, the more knowledge, the better. People with short answers, usually don't know & usually can't help you learn. =) =)
LaKapitone
Active Member
I know you weren't speaking on the politics of it. I was agreeing with you, lmao. I was telling you the REASON why it isn't like it should be, the way you explained it should be, is because of the politics. That, is what I was - & did - say. I didn't say you didn't understand the politics of it, I was more-so just throwing it out there because not many people do know the politics of things. People see things so one-sided for the most part that they don't see why these things happen. I wasn't directing it like you didn't know buddy, don't worry, no need for the "quotations" lmao.
Somehow, even after writing my response to you the first time, I knew you were going to take it wrong. Even though I was agreeing with everything you said.
The politics shouldn't be involved with most things like you stated. BUT THEY ARE. So there is nothing you can do about it. It's just like marijuana laws, they're wrong, but what can you do? As for children seeing it on TV, I'm sorry that is how it is, but as a parent you have to be more aware. AGAIN, I'm not saying your a bad parent, since you take things defensively lol, what I am saying is... it's the year 2011... television has been corrupt since the early 2000's. Half the shiit on Cartoon Network is adult oriented, drug references in all cartoons, sex references in cartoons, all the time. All you can do is monitor what they see, or put a block on certain stations, such as the news. If your child is to young to watch the news, they probably don't care for it to be blocked. If they are old enough to enjoy the news, chances are they're old enough to handle a viewing of a murder if it just so happened to accidentally catch they're eye.
Not to mention, when they aired that clip they had about 5 min. disclaimers before the clip, saying it wasn't suitable for children, so any adult should have known. An if that adult chose to watch it, that's they're choice, the news isn't making you watch anything. If you can't handle night time news or that shiit & you feel your being forced to see things you may not want to see, I suggest you stick to reading the paper, where they don't show such gruesome scenes. I hate the whole "My child shouldn't see this or that" bullcrap. It's 2011, this is the era, the way it is now, whether people like it or not. I don't want to see peoples ASSES hanging out of they're pants, but I do, an there's nothing I can do about it.
If my child kills someone, I won't blame GTA IV. It's stupid. If your child see's something you didn't want them to see, that's on you or whoever was caring to that child at the time. You can easily buy $1.00 DVD's from the stores of cartoons an cut the cable from them altogether, but it's life an you have to figure something out, bitching about it won't do shiit. Not to say your bitching, lmao, I know it also sucks to have to buy DVD's an not let your child watch TV, that's dumb. But, that's life, it's also dumb that I have to pay $145 car insurance, when the next dude only pays $45, but it's life, I figure it out, I do it. Even though it sucks...
olylifter420
Well-Known Member
Google images
osama bin laden shot in the face
osama bin laden shot in the face
LaKapitone
Active Member
I'll post 1 of the 500 I found... or maybe all 500? Then we can have 500 different images of proof! Yay! The irony in that...
OregonMeds
Well-Known Member
The only images osama bin laden shot in face bring up are re-edits of previously faked photo's from well over 2 years ago.
All are fake, based on the same image and based on osama v2 the actor/comic relief stand in from 2007 after the original died of cancer or whatever actually got him.
We don't really need to see any images for real though, I'm sure he'll be unrecognisable with half a head missing or something.
And besides, we already claimed 99.9% DNA match right, which is both medically and scientifically impossible in and of itself and would mean we had to have him before to get his DNA and then have let him go, so there's the truth right there.
This is the best proof we have:
[youtube]OQ0qsx-ZG8c[/youtube]
All are fake, based on the same image and based on osama v2 the actor/comic relief stand in from 2007 after the original died of cancer or whatever actually got him.
We don't really need to see any images for real though, I'm sure he'll be unrecognisable with half a head missing or something.
And besides, we already claimed 99.9% DNA match right, which is both medically and scientifically impossible in and of itself and would mean we had to have him before to get his DNA and then have let him go, so there's the truth right there.
This is the best proof we have:
[youtube]OQ0qsx-ZG8c[/youtube]