Obama to Apologize for the Osama bin Laden Hit

[Beerina]

You have specific sources who told you explicitly that the information was obtained by torture; but you can't reveal the sources. So, we cannot check their validity. So, this information amounts to an unsubstantiated and unsubstaniatable claim. Do you have anything else - preferably something that can be tested - to support your assertion?

There's the correct answer. Claim made, fair enough. Evidence?

And yes, you might indeed know someone who actually knows something. If it comes out in the upcoming months, congrats, you were right.

Until then, we have to file it away as just another theory and watch as things develop.


Any skeptic must admit, "It's true, I know someone who knows, trust me" doesn't have a solid track record of results.

 

[Ryokan]

My sources say that the information was obtained by torture. But my sources cannot go public.

My sources says your sources are wrong. Sadly, my sources can't go public either.

 

[RandFan]

Until then, we have to file it away as just another theory and watch as things develop.

It's more than that. It's a theory that flies in the face of facts and experts who says it doesn't work.

 

[Monketi Ghost]

I still can't believe we elected Obama as POTUS. Have we forgotten 9/11?

 

[marplots]

If the military in all its might and glory swooped down out of the sky and killed me in my home, I'd be pretty darn upset about it. They shot that poor old man dead without even giving him a chance to call his lawyer.

An apology would be a start, but there ought to be financial compensation for the violation of human rights. Where was the trial? Where was the jury? It's Trayvon Martin all over again. I have to agree with Bill T on this one.

 

[varwoche]

What torture is not:

• the method that obtained information about the courier from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed

What torture is:

• this goofy thread
• the method that would be necessary in order to get a straight answer from Bill Thompson, normal interrogation having failed

​

 

[angrysoba]

No. My thread title is designed to expose the illiterate and lazy.

Surely they either can't or won't read the thread title.

 

[hgc]

My sources say that the information was obtained by torture. But my sources cannot go public.

That, right there, is a 10 megaton thread fail.

 

[varwoche]

That, right there, is a 10 megaton thread fail.

And oddly, this whimsical debate technique has been cropping up recently.

 

[ponderingturtle]

My sources say that the information was obtained by torture. But my sources cannot go public.

My sources say that the whole courier fiction was constructed to provide cover for the remote viewers who found him.

 

[Dancing David]

My sources say that the information was obtained by torture. But my sources cannot go public.

The fact that there is a debate in the mainstream news should be telling enough. If it was a slam-dunk that the information was not obtained by torture, there would be no debate.

I think it is a truth no one wants to believe.

Liberalism is just like a religion. We have strong faith that it was not obtained by torture.

Uh huh, I will ask the IPU in my garage next, see what they think.

So why would someone with a security clearance on this material tell you?

 

[Monketi Ghost]

Surely they either can't or won't read the thread title.

*laughing*

angrysoba Johnson is right!

 

[BStrong]

My sources say that the information was obtained by torture. But my sources cannot go public.

The fact that there is a debate in the mainstream news should be telling enough. If it was a slam-dunk that the information was not obtained by torture, there would be no debate.

I think it is a truth no one wants to believe.

Liberalism is just like a religion. We have strong faith that it was not obtained by torture.

Your "sources" break opsec, you reference it in a public forum, and want to claim NTK as justification.

Go peddle your papers elsewhere - If I hear something through the whisper stream, it doesn't go any farther, and it sure as **** doesn't get cited in public.

 

[joobie]

My sources say that the information was obtained by torture. But my sources cannot go public.

my sources say that he also confessed to being responsible for the zimmerman telegram and the dreyfus affair, but that he will skate on those because of a technicality.

 

[RandFan]

Oy vey...

• Start provocative thread.
• Declare secret knowledge.
• Leave.
• Wash.
• Rinse.
• Repeat.

 

[NWO Sentryman]

The location of Osama bin Laden was determined by following a specific message courier. The name of that specific courier was obtained by the means of torture. A central talking point of Liberals and the Democratic party is that torture does not work and is incontrovertibly immoral. Do the ends justify the means? Just as, in an American court of law, evidence and results obtained by illegal means are thrown out, shouldn't Obama have decided not to kill Osama bin Laden? Doesn't Al Qaeda deserve an apology? Obama is quick to apologize, whither it is justified and warranted or not, so shouldn't we all expect him to apologize for this?

0/10. Try harder next time.

 

[jj]

This thread is another example of an utterly dishonest, utterly unethical attempt to "reframe" the debate over what happened to OBL in terms that put the opposition on the defensive.

Reframing a debate means that you tell a lie, basically, in order to put the other person on the defensive. It's not quite that simple, but it's one of Rove's most basic tricks.

 

[marplots]

This thread is another example of an utterly dishonest, utterly unethical attempt to "reframe" the debate over what happened to OBL in terms that put the opposition on the defensive.

Reframing a debate means that you tell a lie, basically, in order to put the other person on the defensive. It's not quite that simple, but it's one of Rove's most basic tricks.

Did it work?

 

[RandFan]

Did it work?

Very much so. It got Bush elected and reelected. The thing is that such tactics eventually are figured out and strategies devised against them. I think it will have less and less success.

 

[jj]

Did it work?

It worked splendidly, people voted for 'W' even though he is going to be regarded as literally the worst president of the USA in history, because every attempt to point out the simple facts of his destructive, intentionally divisive policies was met with the "why do you hate America" defining of the opponent. Now we see the same deliberately destructive, America-hating activity directed toward Obama, but it's no longer associated with "hate America" because of who is doing it.