It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Oliver North: "I would not have announced Osama's death to the public"

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 6 2011 @ 10:30 AM
link   
This morning on my way to work I was listening to the John Oakley show on AM640 here in Toronto.
Oakley was interviewing Oliver North regarding the latest developments on the war on terror.
Some stunning comments were made:

#1: North specifically stated that if he were in charge, or even advising the White House, he would tell them to not divulge any information at all to the public about the killing of OBL, but to keep it a secret.

My reaction: Why? To continue this war on a concept? "Terror" They'll do that anyways!

#2: He agrees this whole thing is an approval ratings move by the Obama administration

My reaction: Duh, you think? They're just wagging the dog here...

#3: He does not want the pictures or any footage made public for fear of US forces being charged with anything in the international court @ the Hague

My reaction: Interesting, is this because he was illegally assasinated on foreign soil, or because there may be proof that he was unarmed and in no position to resist? Or, because the crazies that want to defend OBL's "Human Rights" which were violated when... well... he stopped being a human and became a corpse LOL

Your thoughts on the interview?
The John Oakley Show (scroll down to the bottom to play the interview.)

Personally I think he's still alive and in secret custody to never surface again...

edit on 6-5-2011 by Konstantinos because: fixed link & typos




posted on May, 6 2011 @ 10:35 AM
link   
Why would you think he's in secret custody? Then they would have to forever worry about him being found out. No, I think he's dead for sure... when he was killed I don't know.



posted on May, 6 2011 @ 10:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Soldier of God
Why would you think he's in secret custody? Then they would have to forever worry about him being found out. No, I think he's dead for sure... when he was killed I don't know.


Well my theory is that this guy was probably far too much of an intel jackpot to take out with a simple double-tap.

I'm no expert on intelligence or covert ops, but if I were running the CIA, I'd have him stunned/wounded.
Then taken and locked away within a massively secured underground compound within the US, and then take my sweet old time extracting info in any way I choose, without even the whitehouse knowing about it.

I know, I disturb myself sometimes LOL

edit on 6-5-2011 by Konstantinos because: I'm a typo fiend



posted on May, 6 2011 @ 10:47 AM
link   
He does not want the pictures or any footage made public for fear of US forces being charged with anything in the international court @ the Hague
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

just the fact that North is thinking like this
makes me believe that they would have
a case for war crimes.
Would that also mean that Obama
would be charged as well since he
sent them ????



posted on May, 6 2011 @ 10:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Konstantinos

Originally posted by Soldier of God
Why would you think he's in secret custody? Then they would have to forever worry about him being found out. No, I think he's dead for sure... when he was killed I don't know.


Well my theory is that this guy was probably far too much of an intel jackpot to take out with a simple double-tap.

I'm no expert on intelligence or covert ops, but if I were running the CIA, I'd have him stunned/wounded.
Then taken and locked away within a massively secured underground compound within the US, and then take my sweet old time extracting info in any way I choose, without even the whitehouse knowing about it.

I know, I disturb myself sometimes LOL

edit on 6-5-2011 by Konstantinos because: I'm a typo fiend


I think you nailed that on the head nicly.

If infact all the reports coming out saying he was unarmed then his 'body' flown to a USS carrier.

This all stinks to high heaven as the American way is to blow sh*t up first and ask questions later. If no evidence is realeased of his body.

I will always suspect deep down, he's in a dention center some where. Why would you kill an unarmed man when that is 'apparently' the head of the worlds biggest terrorist orginasation when you could pump him for infromation.



posted on May, 6 2011 @ 11:23 AM
link   
I find it hilarious to no end that so many people are willing to buy into the idea that OBL isn't dead.

I really do think that it was supposed to be a capture mission til someone looked at OBL and decided he wasn't worth the millions in holding and keeping him, and instead gave him $0.97USD worth of revenge (the cost of two bullets).

As for the burial at sea - well now they can't go and enshrine him, worship and put up an altar to the great jihadist... he's shrimp food now. I still think someone may have had some ham fat on their fingers as they prepped his burial stuff. Burial with an unclean animal prevents a Muslim from going to heaven....

In reality - there's too much to lose with a potential holding of OBL, and a lot to gain by simply smoking him and then disallowing him to become a focal point.



posted on May, 6 2011 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by MagoSA
I find it hilarious to no end that so many people are willing to buy into the idea that OBL isn't dead.

I really do think that it was supposed to be a capture mission til someone looked at OBL and decided he wasn't worth the millions in holding and keeping him, and instead gave him $0.97USD worth of revenge (the cost of two bullets).

As for the burial at sea - well now they can't go and enshrine him, worship and put up an altar to the great jihadist... he's shrimp food now. I still think someone may have had some ham fat on their fingers as they prepped his burial stuff. Burial with an unclean animal prevents a Muslim from going to heaven....

In reality - there's too much to lose with a potential holding of OBL, and a lot to gain by simply smoking him and then disallowing him to become a focal point.


Fair enough, I can see your logic in just killing the guy on the spot and not having to worry about anything.
But do you not see the value in torturing him for more info? (Let's not lie, they would torture his ass off).
Personally, I see too many flaws in the story.

First he had a rifle and got into a 40 minute firefight... result? Fundamentalists declare him a warrior to the end, fighting the infidels to his last breath...
errr... ok, he actually was NOT armed, so he's not a warrior to the end, HAH!.... result? You bastards! You killed an unarmed man!
errrr...ok, he was not armed, but he resisted! Therefore we shot him in the head and heart.... result? What the hell did he resist with? Did he use harsh language? Could your highly-trained crack team of SEALS not subdue, wound, or knock out a unarmed resister?

The story keeps changing... this is why I think he's still alive and in secret custody.

As for burial at sea to avoid enshrining him, why did they not do the same for Sadam Hussein? Or Al-Zarqawi? Or any of the other Jihadists they killed and provided photographic evidence? Are any of them currently enshrined? Infact, isn't it against Islam to put any form of altar on a gravesite?



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join