Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Was Osama Bin Laden a patsy?

Options
124»

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,798 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    ShatterAlan wrote: »
    You keep telling me that the facts are in history books and encyclopediae.

    Yes.

    You've randomly decided a speculative news report from 2001 is correct.

    Yet when the same news channel (and rest of the world) confirmed his death, in 2011, you've randomly decided it's not correct.

    You haven't provided any basis or logic for that decision apart from your own incredulity.

    The history books will tell you a bunch of shit and it's up to you to believe it or question it.

    And there it is, "academia is wrong".

    You aren't "questioning" anything, you are just engaging in uninformed and petty denial about a subject you seem to know little about.


  • Options
    #93
    ShatterAlan
    Registered Users Posts: 2,807 ✭✭✭ShatterAlan


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Yes.

    You've randomly decided a speculative news report from 2001 is correct.

    Yet when the same news channel (and rest of the world) confirmed his death, in 2011, you've randomly decided it's not correct.

    You haven't provided any basis or logic for that decision apart from your own incredulity.




    And there it is, "academia is wrong".

    You aren't "questioning" anything, you are just engaging in uninformed


    and petty denial about a subject you seem to know little about.


    Who exactly "confirmed" anything?


    And "the rest of the world"?


    I didn't decide anything, as you continuously try to state. I expressed doubt. Now can you engage in a discussion without lying? Can you backtrack, read and then debate without telling lies? If so, I'd be happy to verbally butt heads. If you continue to lie and attempt to couch your discussion in not only ambiguity but a tissue of falsehoods then we probably have precious little about which to talk.


  • Options
    #94
    ShatterAlan
    Registered Users Posts: 2,807 ✭✭✭ShatterAlan


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Yes.

    You've randomly decided a speculative news report from 2001 is correct.

    Yet when the same news channel (and rest of the world) confirmed his death, in 2011, you've randomly decided it's not correct.

    You haven't provided any basis or logic for that decision apart from your own incredulity.




    And there it is, "academia is wrong".

    You aren't "questioning" anything, you are just engaging in uninformed and petty denial about a subject you seem to know little about.


    History books.



    You put a lot a your own personal faith in what is written in them?
    Are they ever wrong?


    Written by bullshitters?
    Bullshitters paid to paint a picture?


    The history books that you read, if indeed you do read them, will tell you "facts" that you want to believe.


    Will those books tell you that Washington was a slaver or that Jefferson raped most of his own slaves? No, you won't read that in any history book.


    Will your history books tell you what really happened on September 11 (and I'm not talking about 2001), I'm talking about Chile.



    Go read some real books and talk to some people and don't waste my time with your "history" books.


  • Options
    #95
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    He definitely wasn't a patsy, he despised America and intended to destroy it.

    Robert Fisk met him in '96 and Bin Laden explicitly told him that he intended to destroy America, for a myriad of reasons;

    - He blamed the Yanks for Saudi Arabia (his homeland remember) not being the Sharia stronghold it was promised to be upon its founding.

    - He blamed America for aiding Abdul Aziz al-Saud in setting up a kingdom, not for the people of Saudi Arabia, but for his own family.

    - The arrival of American troops in Saudi Arabia in 1990 after Saddam invaded Kuwait particularly galled him - he saw it as the ultimate betrayal that the Saudis had invited the Yanks in to murder fellow Muslims.

    - He hated the Yanks support of "the Jews in Palestine."


    Whatever happened to him afterwards may be up for debate, but one thing is absolute - he wanted to bring down the US.


  • Options
    #96
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    ShatterAlan wrote: »
    You put a lot a your own personal faith in what is written in them?
    Are they ever wrong?

    Written by bullshitters?
    Bullshitters paid to paint a picture?
    So we should listen to anonymous conspiracy theorists on the internet cause they've never been wrong about anything?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    The Nal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,540 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    ShatterAlan wrote: »
    Will those books tell you that Washington was a slaver

    Yes. This is common knowledge and in all the history books about him. Amzed you don't know this. Really basic common knowledge.

    "George Washington is a hard master, very severe, a hard husband, a hard father, a hard governor. From his childhood he always ruled and ruled severely. He was first brought up to govern slaves."

    Thomas Jefferson, 1799
    ShatterAlan wrote: »
    or that Jefferson raped most of his own slaves?

    It was always studied and argued but now we know its true thanks to DNA analysis which didn't exist until a few decades ago.
    ShatterAlan wrote: »
    No, you won't read that in any history book.

    :o

    Genuinely astonishing how people can be so wrong so often yet keep posting wrong things.


  • Options
    #98
    Fionn1952
    Registered Users Posts: 3,398 ✭✭✭Fionn1952


    The Nal wrote: »
    Yes. This is common knowledge and in all the history books about him. Amzed you don't know this. Really basic common knowledge.

    "George Washington is a hard master, very severe, a hard husband, a hard father, a hard governor. From his childhood he always ruled and ruled severely. He was first brought up to govern slaves."

    Thomas Jefferson, 1799



    It was always studied and argued but now we know its true thanks to DNA analysis which didn't exist until a few decades ago.



    :o

    Genuinely astonishing how people can be so wrong so often yet keep posting wrong things.

    Very strange how many of these, 'what the history books don't want you to know' type of facts happen to be brought to mass attention by history books.....I learned both of those things from books. I don't recall learning very much from conspiracy blogs on the Internet, bar how to improve my BS filter.


  • Options
    #99
    Lmkrnr
    Registered Users Posts: 187 ✭✭Lmkrnr


    Old man in underwear watching VHS tapes of 9/11 in a box room of a massive compound/prison screams patsy to me.

    Oh I'l just secretly record you too, so these tapes will be found and released immediately when we decide to kill you.


  • Options
    #100
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,798 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    ShatterAlan wrote: »
    History books.



    You put a lot a your own personal faith in what is written in them?
    Are they ever wrong?


    Written by bullshitters?
    Bullshitters paid to paint a picture?


    The history books that you read, if indeed you do read them, will tell you "facts" that you want to believe.

    Translation: "Academia is a conspiracy"
    Will those books tell you that Washington was a slaver or that Jefferson raped most of his own slaves? No, you won't read that in any history book.

    Yes. Where do you think you got that information from?
    Will your history books tell you what really happened on September 11 (and I'm not talking about 2001), I'm talking about Chile.

    Yes. Likewise.
    Go read some real books and talk to some people and don't waste my time with your "history" books.

    Right, what's the difference between a "real" book and a book covering the history of an event or person?


  • Options
    #101
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Right, what's the difference between a "real" book and a book covering the history of an event or person?
    Does it agree with Alan's worldview?

    If yes, then it's a real book.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    The Nal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,540 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    Fionn1952 wrote: »
    Very strange how many of these, 'what the history books don't want you to know' type of facts happen to be brought to mass attention by history books.....I learned both of those things from books. I don't recall learning very much from conspiracy blogs on the Internet, bar how to improve my BS filter.

    "You won't read about George Washington owning slaves in history books" (slight paraphrase) is one of the best things I've ever read on the internet.


  • Options
    #103
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,798 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    So we've had the "Bin Laden probably didn't die in 2011 because recorded history is all a lie" spiel

    Haven't seen anything of substance to suggest Bin Laden was a "patsy" or that he died at any other time (or is still alive)


  • Options
    #104
    ShatterAlan
    Registered Users Posts: 2,807 ✭✭✭ShatterAlan


    The Nal wrote: »
    Yes. This is common knowledge and in all the history books about him. Amzed you don't know this. Really basic common knowledge.

    "George Washington is a hard master, very severe, a hard husband, a hard father, a hard governor. From his childhood he always ruled and ruled severely. He was first brought up to govern slaves."

    Thomas Jefferson, 1799



    It was always studied and argued but now we know its true thanks to DNA analysis which didn't exist until a few decades ago.



    :o

    Genuinely astonishing how people can be so wrong so often yet keep posting wrong things.


    I'm bringing attention to "history" books.....books that paint people and events in a light that scores points or pads a narrative. What part of that escaped you?

    Did not Reagan refer to the Mujihadeen as the "Jeffersons of Afghanistan"?

    If the rape and torture and enslavement was what he was referring to then he might have a point, except that I think he was trying to allude that they were shaking off the yoke of Soviet intervention the same way that Jefferson and Washington did the same to vanquish the Redcoats.

    20 years later, the US has been roundly defeated in Afghanistan. They will leave this year having accomplished nothing. But the history books will run off the print press reading that their 20 year joke of an occupation improved matters. I would guess that most of the US cannon fodder holed up in bases in Afghanistan weren't ene born in 2011 and those that were were still in nappies or short pants.

    The US wanted Bin Laden to be handed over for 9/11 and the Taliban said "No problem.....show us the proof". The US said "fcuk you we're going to assault and wreck your country". And now they're going home, in humility and defeat. How easy it would have been to just provide the proof back 20 years ago..


  • Options
    #105
    ShatterAlan
    Registered Users Posts: 2,807 ✭✭✭ShatterAlan


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Translation: "Academia is a conspiracy"



    Yes. Where do you think you got that information from?



    Yes. Likewise.



    Right, what's the difference between a "real" book and a book covering the history of an event or person?


    Academia is not a conspiracy. But if you glean that from historically inaccurate accounts in books then that is your wont. Dont accuse me of it.


  • Options
    #106
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users Posts: 38,247 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    Did we get a list of the information that shows how all logic points to bin Laden being dead before 2011 yet?


  • Options
    #107
    The Nal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,540 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    ShatterAlan wrote: »
    I'm bringing attention to "history" books.....books that paint people and events in a light that scores points or pads a narrative. What part of that escaped you?

    The part where you said you won't read about Washingtons slaves in history books. Its been written about for centuries.

    The rest of your post is deflective waffle. History will show Afghanistan and Iraq as a spectacular failure. "History books" have already been written about this.


  • Options
    #108
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,798 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    ShatterAlan wrote: »
    Academia is not a conspiracy. But if you glean that from historically inaccurate accounts in books then that is your wont. Dont accuse me of it.

    "Academia is wrong because I say it is" - and then you list a bunch of uninformed examples

    Sorting between all your tangents and rants, it appears you believe Bin Laden died in 2001 based on one news report from one news channel that you can't remember.

    The same news channel that confirmed he died in 2011. Stunning logic going on there.


  • Options
    #109
    ShatterAlan
    Registered Users Posts: 2,807 ✭✭✭ShatterAlan


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    "Academia is wrong because I say it is" - and then you list a bunch of uninformed examples

    Sorting between all your tangents and rants, it appears you believe Bin Laden died in 2001 based on one news report from one news channel that you can't remember.

    The same news channel that confirmed he died in 2011. Stunning logic going on there.


    Why would you say that I believe that academia is a conspiracy?


  • Options
    #110
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    ShatterAlan wrote: »
    Why would you say that I believe that academia is a conspiracy?
    Because you believe that they are presenting false information at the behest of the government.

    If this isn't what you're claiming, why else do you believe that all history books are wrong, but your internet research on twitter and youtube is perfectly accurate?

    Are you just far better at research and analysing than all academics?


  • Options
    #111
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,798 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    ShatterAlan wrote: »
    Why would you say that I believe that academia is a conspiracy?

    Because you claimed that history books are full of lies and hinted via question that authors of them are paid to lie

    Again, all of this is the usual clown sideshow of waffle and whataboutery to deflect from the fact that you haven't said anything of substance about the subject

    Did Bin Laden die in 2001, when, where, how?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    ShatterAlan
    Registered Users Posts: 2,807 ✭✭✭ShatterAlan


    The Nal wrote: »
    The part where you said you won't read about Washingtons slaves in history books. Its been written about for centuries.

    The rest of your post is deflective waffle. History will show Afghanistan and Iraq as a spectacular failure. "History books" have already been written about this.


    Will you read about that in school history books or in books that nobody wants to read? You know the big tomes sandwiched up on the top left shelf of B&N?


    What history books have you read outside of your Inter Cert? Few, I would imagine.



    Was Jefferson's rapes, corruption and cowardice ever codified in a history book? Certainly not one that will ever be used to teach.


  • Options
    #113
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,798 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    ShatterAlan wrote: »



    Was Jefferson's rapes, corruption and cowardice ever codified in a history book?

    There are dozens of biographies and books about Jefferson, list off the ones that you claim don't mention any of the above..


  • Options
    #114
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,798 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    And deflections aside, explain how you think Bin Laden "probably died" in 2001. Apparently you require a vast amount of evidence, photos, video, etc to believe he died, so what convinced you he died in 2001?


  • Options
    #115
    ShatterAlan
    Registered Users Posts: 2,807 ✭✭✭ShatterAlan


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    There are dozens of biographies and books about Jefferson, list off the ones that you claim don't mention any of the above..


    I know of Jefferson's chequered past. You will not, however, read any of this in history books. Now perhaps you are attempting to nitpick and claim that NO history books cover such episodes and then lay that claim at my door and demand that I cite books that paint the man in a favourable light.



    I'll digress. Do school history books or television documentaries mention slavery, sedition, cowardice, subterfuge, rapine and any other quality that would cast a shadow upon the myth?


  • Options
    #116
    ShatterAlan
    Registered Users Posts: 2,807 ✭✭✭ShatterAlan


    But once again, you are trying to derail and pull the debate to the realms of foggy nettlehood.


    You claimed that I said that academia was a conspiracy. I said no such thing. I mentioned falsehoods or omissions. Nothing more.


  • Options
    #117
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    ShatterAlan wrote: »
    You claimed that I said that academia was a conspiracy. I said no such thing. I mentioned falsehoods or omissions. Nothing more.
    Again yes you did.
    You've claimed that these "falsehoods and omissions" occured at the behest of some shadowy patty for some nefarious purpose.
    This is a conspiracy.

    If that's not what you believe, why do you believe these falsehoods exist?
    It surely can't be that you're simply a better historian than people who are trained in the field.
    It can't be your lazy Twitter and YouTube watching is somehow more accurate than actual research...

    I'm curious how exactly you learned about the "true history" of Jefferson when you're claiming it's not in any book...


  • Options
    #118
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,798 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    ShatterAlan wrote: »
    I know of Jefferson's chequered past. You will not, however, read any of this in history books. Now perhaps you are attempting to nitpick and claim that NO history books cover such episodes and then lay that claim at my door and demand that I cite books that paint the man in a favourable light.

    Wow. Where do you think your information comes from?

    People who study the past maybe, "historians"?


  • Options
    #119
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,798 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    ShatterAlan wrote: »
    But once again, you are trying to derail and pull the debate to the realms of foggy nettlehood.


    You claimed that I said that academia was a conspiracy. I said no such thing. I mentioned falsehoods or omissions. Nothing more.

    You claimed that historians are paid to write lies. Who gives them the money? are they all paid to write the same lie?

    All the history books on Jefferson are wrong according to you, that's a conspiracy by academia, they bribed? how does it work?



    This is a thread about Bin Laden, here's the question again

    Explain how you think Bin Laden "probably died" in 2001. Apparently you require a vast amount of evidence, photos, video, etc to believe he died, so what convinced you he died in 2001?


  • Options
    #120
    The Nal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,540 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    ShatterAlan wrote: »
    What history books have you read outside of your Inter Cert? Few, I would imagine.

    What a weird (and totally incorrect) assumption.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement