Revealed: Military emails show that NO U.S. sailors witnessed Bin Laden's secret burial at sea

page: 3
33
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 02:39 AM
link   
I thought I remembered this:

By SUSAN DONALDSON JAMES

May 2, 2011

Video of Osama bin Laden's dead body being dropped into the North Arabian Sea from the USS Carl Vinson early this morning could be made public, according to officials.

The 40-minute ceremony, and perhaps photos of his corpse, will be released "cautiously," according to The Associated Press, citing two Pentagon officials.

The world's most notorious terrorist did not receive a customary Islamic burial as he was slipped into the North Arabian Sea today when no others countries would accept his body, according to experts in Muslim funeral rites.

"Dumping the body into the sea is not part of any Islamic ritual," said Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, president of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy and a physician of internal medicine. "Koranic scripture says God created him and he must return to the earth."

U.S. officials told ABC News that the last thing they wanted was to create a burial place which could become a terrorist shrine. To avoid that, bin Laden was buried at sea.

Deputy National Security Advisor John Brennan said earlier today that the administration would likely release an image of bin Laden's body. He added that they would do so carefully as, "We don't want to do anything to compromise our ability to be successful the next time we get one of these guys and take him off the battlefield," he said.

abcnews.go.com...

"40-minute ceremony"? The two storys dont seem to add up.

adit:
"the administration would likely release an image of bin Laden's body' I remember my BS radar going off when I heard this.

"We don't want to do anything to compromise our ability to be successful the next time" Can anyone think of how releasing such image/footage might do this? I can't.

"officials told ABC News that the last thing they wanted was to create a burial place which could become a terrorist shrine" Why not, then they could put surveilance on anybody who went to it or drop the occasional drone on the sight and wipe out a few enemy.
edit on 24/11/12 by Cinrad because: To fill it out a bit




posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 03:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Originally posted by Wonderer2012
So, only a very small percentage of the crew were even made aware that Bin Laden was onboard the USS Carl Vinson. Not only that, there was no autopsy report or death certificate.


First off, it shouldn't be a surprise to anybody who has served or are familiar with the fact that active duty personnel's correspondence is censored. SOP. Second, Autopsy? The guy had two in the head and one in the chest? What's it going to say? "He died from lead poisoning"? Third, Death certificate?

Really?

Death certificate?


I'm not saying there isn't something fishy {Excuse the pun} about the whole thing but they need to come up with something a bit more substantial imho.
edit on 23-11-2012 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)


Well to be honest Slayer; I think you are cherry picking a bit here in your reply. You correctly stated that it is standard operating procedure for limited personnel to be aware of sensitive information. However, how can you argue the point of SOP, and then throw it out completely when it comes to regards of the autopsy report and death certificate? It is SOP to produce an autopsy report on just about anybody that dies; especially an enemy of the Government. Even suicide victims get autopsy reports, and their cause of death should be apparent. Death certificate, well I'm sure they issue birth certificates there; it would stand to reason he is issued a death certificate, correct?



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 03:09 AM
link   
reply to post by VeritasAequitas
 


Are you asking or stating a point of fact?
Cherry picking? I think not. As I mentioned elsewhere in the thread I tossed in my opinion and asked some questions. If you have some sourced facts then by all means please post them and share with us their findings.

Please.



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 03:16 AM
link   
hehehe, lead poisoning of the sinus cavity..haha



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 04:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wonderer2012

Revealed: Military emails show that NO U.S. sailors witnessed Bin Laden's secret burial at sea


www.dai lymail.co.uk

Internal emails among U.S. military officers indicate that no American sailors watched Osama bin Laden's burial at sea from the USS Carl Vinson, and traditional Islamic procedures were followed during the secret ceremony.

The emails, obtained by The Associated Press through the Freedom of Information Act, are heavily blacked out, but are the first public disclosure of government information about the al-Qaida leader's death.


Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk...
(visit the link for the full news article)
edit on 23-11-2012 by Wonderer2012 because: (no reason given)

As if they were going to just dump him in the sea! What a load of BS



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 05:10 AM
link   
I caught a fish thiiiiiiiiiis big but no 1 saw it. I like how they released pictures of who actually died there except for those of bin laden.



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 05:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69
I'm not saying there isn't something fishy {Excuse the pun} about the whole thing but they need to come up with something a bit more substantial imho.


Something more substantial?
So you are willing to believe the words of politicians, just the words, no evidence required. When someone comes up with something contradictory to that official line, it is those who need to come up with something more substantial?

Seems a little on the hypocritical side to me.

How about we start asking the people with an agenda (politicians) to come up with something more substantial, instead of just believing the cr@p that comes out of their mouths without questioning it?

Maybe nationalistic 'pride' is preventing you (+others) from questioning the people you should be questioning.

There is zero evidence to confirm OBL was killed that day, we only have the politicians (actors) words to go on.
When a conspiracy theorist comes along and says OBL wasnt killed, too many inconsistencies in the official story, no evidence provided, etc etc. that conspiracy theorist is derided.

Why believe the words of one person, yet reject the words of another?
Why believe the words of someone with a political agenda, yet reject those of someone who just wants the truth/evidence?

Operation Neptune Spear - Neptune, the King/God of the sea and of horses.



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 06:20 AM
link   


Revealed: Military emails show that NO U.S. sailors witnessed Bin Laden's secret burial at sea...


Would it be impertinent of me as a newbie to point out the apparent fact that NO US sailor stated that they did not see the Bin Laden burial at sea. The article is speculating over implied hearsay from unseen emails.

Further still, had the sea burial been an actual secret the president would not have disclosed it during his announcement of Bin Laden's death.



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 06:36 AM
link   
reply to post by OratoryHeist
 

Agreed.

There is ZERO physical evidence that he was killed. No photo of a body, no video footage. Nothing at all.

And here's what I find really funny: The most notable skeptics on Above Top Secret are always demanding proof, aren't they? (I won't name any names, but I'm sure you all know who I mean) Whenever a thread is started about a Near Death Experience, they demand solid proof. Ghosts? Same thing, they want solid proof. Bigfoot? Aliens? You'd better have proof, or the skeptics will just wipe their a** with the thread, and they won't sleep well until the thread is derailed like a freight train after the conductor had a stroke. But then a thread like this comes along, and we say that there's no proof of his death, and these same people that demand irrefutable proof in the paranormal threads have the nerve to say "Nope these are just silly conspiracies. We know that he's dead, we have all the proof we need. Case closed."

Why are they demanding solid proof in other threads when other subjects are being discussed, but not this one? Skeptics always love to use toe 'burden of proof' argument. Well, the burden of proof is on you this time guys. If you say that he really is dead, please produce the proof. You won't be able to, because there is none. And by proof I don't mean links to mainstream news media articles that more or less say "Yep, he's dead" and don't provide any actual evidence.

Also, to those of you who use this argument: "They didn't release any photos of his body because they didn't want to stir up even more anger and hatred towards America in the Middle East"... No. That's an invalid argument for one simple reason. Wouldn't just merely killing Bin Laden stir up hatred and anger in his loyalists? How would a photograph of his body make it any worse? Even just the fact that America was responsible for his death would be enough to send them into a blind rage. A photograph is going to do even more damage? Get real. I heard so many people use this argument when it happened. Even the news used it. Sorry, but it makes absolutely no sense





posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 06:45 AM
link   
Surely with the general public's inability to focus on anything much, Bin Laden was worth considerably more alive than dead to the Western powers?

He was the focus, he became the watchword, the shorthand for terrorism... I was always quite shocked when they said he'd been killed by a US force.

Seems to me that unless he is alive and being debriefed in a Californian rest home or Montana ranch with sweeping views all they could do with the body was bury it at an undisclosed grid reference at sea.



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 07:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xaphan
I still don't believe that he was killed. I've said it before and I'll say it again: Pics or it didn't happen.
He was killed by Omar Sheikh in 2007. Benazir Bhutto said it during an interview shortly before she was assasinated.



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 07:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Merlin Lawndart
 


Threads like this one are always stacked full of ignorance to be clear I am not picking on you it just so happens that your post most clearly demonstrates this.

ATS is full of people who think they know what they are talking about, I blame the meida for this and its oversimplification of matters relating to terrorism. The result however is that there are lots of members on ATS who think they know what they are talking about when it comes to matters of terrorism and in particular Al-Qa’ida when the truth is that they don’t. Your post is a perfect example of this.

Take for example your first claim that Bin Laden was killed in 2001, if you read by above post that is clearly not the case. My sources for that post come mainly from 3 authors who were all on the ground and directly involved with the hunt for Bin Laden during late 2001 and not from some random website or the tabloid press. It is very clear that after 2001 Bin Laden was still very much alive.

The second error is your claim about the members of Seal Team Six who took part in Operation Neptune Spear all ending up dead. “Seal Team Six” is not a team like a football team or a regular squad in the rangers for example, “Seal Team Six” is actually the United States Naval Special Warfare Development Group (NSWDG). Its exact size is unknown but it’s made up for 4 (or 5 if you count Black) squadrons it was a mix of NSWDG members form Red Squadron with one exception who took part in Operation Neptune Spear. The members killed in the helicopter crash where all from Gold Squadron none of the men on that helicopter took part in Operation Neptune Spear. You are wrong to claim that the members of Seal Team Six involved in the Bin Laden operation where killed just like you are wrong to say he died in 2001.



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 07:18 AM
link   
reply to post by poloblack
 




He was killed by Omar Sheikh in 2007. Benazir Bhutto said it during an interview shortly before she was assasinated.


Yet another one!

Conspiracy theorists love that video of Bhutto talking saying Bin Laden was murdered; the fact is however that Bhutto misspoke. In the video she uses the name Bin Laden twice before she appears to say “the man who murdered Osama bin laden”. She then moves and it as at this point she makes reference to the man who murdered Osama Bin Laden as being, Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh. Just one problem Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh has been in prison in Pakistan since early 2002 on for the execution of Daniel Pearl. That is what she meant to say “the man who murdered Daniel Pearl” not Osama Bin Laden. All sides agree broadly that Bin Laden was alive during early 2002 so there is no way that Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh could have murdered Bin Laden as he was in prison at that time and remains in prison to this very day. Interestingly new evidence may mean he will be released but that is a conversation for another time.

That video is quite simply Bhutto misspeaking.



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 07:28 AM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 


What fun is that logical well thought out post, when we have shadow govt. agencies and ops to expose? Where in your post does it put down the US or Israel? Where are the ignorantly flimsy assertions that Bin Laden was a CIA op or that he didn't exist?

If you expect to fit in around here, your going to have to let go of that logic and critical thinking.

FYI: "Military emails show that NO U.S. sailors witnessed Bin Laden's secret burial at sea"
WRONG: This is what is on the record "Less than a dozen us service men were present"

Ok, ok... Putting my logic and common sense back in my pockets and going else where on the play ground.



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 07:38 AM
link   
reply to post by MobiusShaun
 


ATS does not like logic and critical thinking to produce analytical and factually correct balanced posts. ATS loves the spectacular, the exciting Hollywood threads I could for example spend a month or so writing a thread that would debunk the myth that Bin Laden was ever an agent of the CIA but what would the point be if members of ATS are not interested in truth.

ATS is now about the spectacular rather than the truth, it’s no longer about denying ignore it’s about embracing ignorance like a Hollywood script. Take the OP for example this article actually adds to the mass of evidence proving that Bin Laden was killed that day as it provides details about how his body was prepared for burial and details of the ceremony. Yet ATS finds this evidence and the OP twists it into “no sailors present “ its presented in such a way as to suggest that nobody on the ship knew the body was there or saw it and as such perhaps his body was never even on that boat because he wasn’t killed that day. Such claims are a Hollywood twist of the truth as this article clearly shows that senior members of the crew know of the presence of his body.

Thanks for your post dude!

edit on 24-11-2012 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 07:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
It is SOP to produce an autopsy report on just about anybody that dies; especially an enemy of the Government. Even suicide victims get autopsy reports, and their cause of death should be apparent.


well i don't know about where you live, but in the past seven years i've had two cousins die and one uncle.
neither one had a autopsy. death certificate stated natural causes.

we think we know how our cousins probably died, one family think drug overdose, the other had epilepsy, and they think he had a seizure , and choked to death.

my uncle was found in his bed dead. sheriffs office said their appeared to be no suspicious circumstances.
so no exact cause is stated on death certificate.



Death certificate, well I'm sure they issue birth certificates there; it would stand to reason he is issued a death certificate, correct?


my understanding on birth certificates, they come from the country your born in, ( except obama's). and if you are killed in another country other than your birth, that country issues a death certificate, and if the cause is disputed in your home country or by family, then in the home country can or will do a autopsy.

according to what has been reported, he was killed in pakistan, and no one in authority there seen the body,
and no one in his home country has either, so who is responsible other than the U.S., and then you have to ask yourself why one was not issued

edit on 24-11-2012 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 08:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by poloblack
 




He was killed by Omar Sheikh in 2007. Benazir Bhutto said it during an interview shortly before she was assasinated.


Yet another one!

Conspiracy theorists love that video of Bhutto talking saying Bin Laden was murdered; the fact is however that Bhutto misspoke. In the video she uses the name Bin Laden twice before she appears to say “the man who murdered Osama bin laden”. She then moves and it as at this point she makes reference to the man who murdered Osama Bin Laden as being, Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh. Just one problem Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh has been in prison in Pakistan since early 2002 on for the execution of Daniel Pearl. That is what she meant to say “the man who murdered Daniel Pearl” not Osama Bin Laden. All sides agree broadly that Bin Laden was alive during early 2002 so there is no way that Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh could have murdered Bin Laden as he was in prison at that time and remains in prison to this very day. Interestingly new evidence may mean he will be released but that is a conversation for another time.

That video is quite simply Bhutto misspeaking.
I stand corrected. I usually try to have my facts straight, but looks like I was off on this one. Oh, well, to err is human.



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 08:41 AM
link   
reply to post by poloblack
 

Thanks for that mate a star for you!



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 08:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by poloblack
 

Thanks for that mate a star for you!



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 09:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Wonderer2012
 
I have always wondered why when the Muslims kill people over so much as a bad word towards the Quran they just let the US military take Ben Laden's body and do what ever they wanted with it. He was there idol, there deliverer if you will and they just let this happen to him without so much as a wimper??
Even if Saudi Arabia did not want him what about the people that worshipped him. They don't know if he is facing Meca or if he got his 72 virgins and they had no chance to build a shrine, how could the Muslims allow the U.S. miltary to make these dicisions, he was killed on land, he should been buried on land according to the Quran.

I guess the Muslims just make stuff up as they go and interpret the Quran to fit what ever meets there needs or this is another big lie like so many other things in this world.





top topics
 
33
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join