He is an EX-TERRORIST!!!

I received yet another note from my Facebook friend who go in for conspiracy theories.

Hey Richard, I was just curious on your take about something. When OBL was allegedly killed recently, the admin claimed that the reason for not being able to bring back the body for confirmation was that they wanted to make sure they didn’t offend Muslims by violating their burial laws. That was their story. Of course, I immediately did an internet search on “Muslim Burial Laws”, and saw that their claim was inaccurate. Found no reference to a 24-hour time limit, and also found that the body is supposed to be buried in the ground. This info is now finally cracking thru in mainstream news media.

You’re a thinker. What’s your take on this? Since we now know that not only did they not need to bury the body at sea to be within burial laws, but that, in fact, they actually, by doing so, Violated said laws…why did they not bring back the body for confirmation?

Don’t bother with the time if you don’t want to, but I think this one is pretty interesting, and I am curious to know what you think.

I responded by doing a Bing search and within four minutes.  Found this link with the following paragraph. Bold Italics are mine.

Muslims strive to bury the deceased as soon as possible after death, avoiding the need for embalming or otherwise disturbing the body of the deceased. An autopsy may be performed, if necessary, but should be done with the utmost respect for the dead.

Now granted, it doesn’t specifically say within twenty four hours.  But I would think that it would be implied.  The idea being that you want to get the body into the ground before putrefaction sets in.
So, I send my friend the link with a note to look at paragraph four.  He responds with the following note.

Not sure what you’re getting at. The whole article looks to have supported what I said. If you meant something different, I missed it.

At this point, I did a Shelia Broflovski and went “What, What, WHAT?!”.  Because he claimed that the sentence that refuted his point actually proved it.
Which is why my next message to him was, shall we say, a tad on the cranky side.

“Muslims strive to bury the deceased as soon as possible after death, avoiding the need for embalming or otherwise disturbing the body of the deceased. An autopsy may be performed, if necessary, but should be done with the utmost respect for the dead.”
AS!
SOON!
AS!
POSSIBLE!
IT’S IN THE FIRST SENTENCE OF THE PARAGRAPH!

I’m not proud of going all caps on this one.  But I felt it was necessary in this situation.  His reply…

Paragraph 4, word 4: Bury.
This much I will spot him.  Yes, a burial at sea is generally only permissible if it is a long sea voyage and cannot reach land before decay of the body begins, which was not the case here. And is a clear deviation.
But answer me this, where would they have buried him?
Now keep in mind that any place on land that Bin Laden would have been become a shrine for would be terrorists.  (Kinda like Jim Morrison’s grave in France, switching out nihilistic medievalists drunk on anger with nihilistic college students drunk on Absinth.) With that in mind, what country would have had him?
Pakistan?
They’re in enough trouble because of Bin Laden as it is.
Afghanistan?
Same reason.  (Also see Iraq.)
Iran?
Contrary to what the Bush Administration used to say, they hated the son of a bitch as much as we did! (Even if they are willing to use his death to poke us in the eye with.)
The US?
Yeah, let’s see how long THAT grave could have stayed urine free.
South America?
“Dude, just leave us out of this.”
As far as confirmation goes.  We got his DNA.   Al-Qaida has confirmed it.  (And you know that they would have been the first to say “Ha, Ha!  You missed!”.) I’m calling it.  He’s dead.  End of story.
Now let’s concentrate on undoing his damage.
Advertisements

About theragingcelt

Actor/Writer/Homegrown Pundit/Cranky Progressive/Sometimes Filmmaker. talesofthegeeknation.com
This entry was posted in Afghanistan, Politics, terrorism. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to He is an EX-TERRORIST!!!

  1. Victor Howard says:

    Once again I was surprised to find my message to you turned into part of a web log posting. But I see that you did not misrepresent me in this one, so no prob. Kudos for being thorough and complete, too.

    (First of all, as a side note to get out of the way…I’m confused by the title of your post. “He is an Ex-Terrorist!!” Is anyone doubting the he is an ex-terrorist? I have not heard or read of anyone who doubts it. I certainly did not say any such thing. I am wondering if you are incorrectly assuming that I think he is still alive. Not too important, though. Anyway….)

    I see that you did a bit of research, and found that the burial at sea is, indeed, a clear deviation. Thanks for posting that.

    To your concern about where to bury him, and the shrine:

    In my internet searches about Muslim burial laws, some of the sites said that not only is the body to be buried in the ground…but also in an UNMARKED grave. Perfect! So the shrine problem is easily solved.

    1)bring the body back for confirmation of assassination

    2)bury the body(wherever) in an unmarked grave, which could have been dug in advance, if need be. Leave.

    3)make the announcement

    If no one knows where he is buried, and the grave is unmarked, then we have no shrine. As for where to bury him…in the US, presumably, for the sake of speed.

    *But none of THAT is the real point anyway.*

    I don’t really care where he would be buried. I will repeat my original question to you: Why did they NOT bring the body back to the US for confirmation?

    The excuse they gave us about Muslim burial laws is bogus, as you have acknowledged yourself. So WHY then?

    Richard, if YOU were the commander-in-chief, and you sent a special-ops team out to get the biggest fugitive on the planet…would you SERIOUSLY not want them to bring back the body(if they were unable to bring him back alive, which I also think is ridiculous) for you to see for confirmation?

    If I were the president, “taking their word for it” would not be enough. And by the way, the American public deserves confirmation as well. WE should also not “take their word for it”. We should have been allowed to see the body. The admin has called this the most important military mission in US history…yet the president apparantly does not need confirmation that it actually happened. Horse Feathers.

    UBL has been dead for years.

  2. Victor Howard says:

    Oops. Just reread your post. Forgot to address your last paragraph. As for DNA…again, this is only something we were TOLD. How do we know it to be true? What is the source? We do not have any confirmation of it at all. Some mystery agency’s word is not good enough.

    America has got to learn that you can’t just turn on your TV set, and believe everything it tells. Guess what…? Sometimes they lie. Shocking. I know.

    We need to learn to lean on the side of scrutiny, rather than blind acceptance, when it comes to believing these proven sources of Lies, Omissions, and Inaccuracies:

    1) American politicians
    2) American govt. agencies
    3) American mainstream media

    Along these same lines, I will address the claim that Al-Qaeda confirmed the recent assassination of UBL. I shared an article on my FB page about this. Richard, did you not read it? I hope you will. It is from infowars.com The article is titled 10 Facts that Confirm the Bin Laden Fable is a Contrived Hoax.

    For brevity’s sake, I will only paste the one the pertains to this point:

    ————————–

    5) As even mainstream journalists began to cast suspicion on the official narrative behind the raid, the media reported that Al-Qaeda itself had confirmed every detail of Obama’s address the the nation. However, the conduit for such a claim was in fact an organization called SITE, which is a notorious Pentagon propaganda front run by the daughter of an Israeli spy that has been caught on numerous occasions releasing fake cartoonish “Al-Qaeda” videos at the most politically expedient times for both the Bush and Obama administrations. The SITE organization is nothing more than a contractor for the U.S. government, receiving some $500,000 a year annually from Uncle Sam, and yet the corporate media instantly swallowed and regurgitated the claim that “Al-Qaeda” had confirmed the official story after SITE directed them to an anonymous posting on an Islamic website.

    ————————

    I noticed that the article you have linked about Al-Qaida confirming it, only vaguely references “the acknowledgement by Al-Qaida”. It does not give a source. It does not so much as even print whatever the alleged acknowledgement quote was. Perhaps now you see why. That article proves nothing, and offers nothing.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s