How much bullshit do you really believe?

Bullshit goes both ways.

So, if you're saying that you'd prefer to believe this bullshit...coming out in a book right at the same time as the GOP convention, (great marketing)
as opposed to the bullshit that was presumably put out by the administration.
(BTW...the story is not from OBL actual killer, but a former Seal who may have been in the mission, this hasn't been confirmed - Link )

I'm not going to say HOW Osama bin Laden got killed.
I'm going to be more comforted that the Mother Fucker is dead. Period.

Now, if you choose to believe an factually ambiguous and unconfirmed book published with VERY fortunate timing...that's fine.
(OMG!!! See how that conspiracy thing works??? )

And if I choose to believe the adminstration as it stands...I'm warm & fuzzy with it.

Am I fool enough to believe everything my government says?? Not at all.
But I'm also wise-enough to see that most lies are CYA...not by intent before the fact.

Next, thing you'll tell me 911 was done by our own government,
The Moon Landing is faked
Area 51 DOES have an alien
JFK had TWO assassins. (Oh yeah, that one is true...)

Listen, I know this. OBL is dead.
Period.
Oh yeah, Obama happened to be President at the time that it happened, good for him...Lucky Bastard.

Now people can go back to reading inflamatory books while they're watching neo-con conventions...
Me, I'm trying to focus reading up on the nation's real problems.

 

I understand why people would come to this line of thinking, but there is a connection being made that doesn't make sense.

Do you think that the Muslims concerned about the rites for Bin Laden were unconcerned about the Muslims who died on September 11?

I don't see the logic in it. Again, it's focusing on Bin Laden the man rather than Islam the religion, which I say is backwards. Maybe some see it as affront to Bin Laden, but I would assume the wider issue is the affront to Islam. Maybe I'm wrong. If anyone could elucidate us one way or the other, that would be great.

 

It's not.

Yes, them too.

Them too.

Them too.

Is it just the radicals? I am curious to know more about those concerned, which is why I've asked about it.

The radicals?

 

Actually, no I didn't because I misread what you wrote originally.

I will again point out that this is a lapse in logic. It seems to assume that one is counter to the other, when it's not. Muslims should be buried according to the Islamic tradition because it's the Islamic tradition.

The argument that I'm most concerned about is the affront to Islam in the mistreatment of corpse of a Muslim. I will reiterate and expand: This is not about respecting Bin Laden; this is not about respecting Islamic radicals; this is about respecting Islam.

I will also reiterate that I'm not entirely sure of the ramifications of the rites or their intentional neglect. All I know is that if it's such an important aspect of Islam, then it should have been addressed, especially considering the context of the entire situation. Why further alienate the Muslim world by trampling its beliefs?

This is fine and good from an atheist perspective. However, most of the world isn't atheistic, and over a billion of them are Muslim.

I will say at this point that it's safe to assume the Muslim response to how Bin Laden's body was treated was mixed. However, I will also assume that many would be offended if not even an minimal attempt at following Muslim rites was conducted.

 

For me, this is where religion goes out the door.
Dead is dead.

For me, any burial is for the symbolism and comfort of those surviving and who morn their loss.
Since the US didn't care as much about those who would morn OBL (for some reason...)
They did the most expedient method according to literal/interpretive respect for a large religion,
but also so his body wouldn't be paraded around like a martyr.

Quite frankly, I think considering that a foreign nation (and supposed "ally") had been harboring him for a decade
and he was literally planning to do more harm to our nation and it's citizens.
That we did the least intrusive precise action possible getting the job done and not allowing the potential of him getting away.
Then removing the body immediately with as much expedited effort as possible, without rubbing their face in it.

All this does, is stir the hornet's nest of the extremist religious islamic population. (which I doubt was their focus, considering how ignorant it is)
And somehow attempt to devalue Obama's relation in this milestone. (which I'm assuming with the publish timing with the GOP convention was the intent)
Oh, he was "peeking" out the door...so that's not "heroic"... so because it wasn't as "honorable", it's not as important, so Obama shouldn't get credit.

This not to change votes. Because no one who is even considering of voting for Obama would believe this absurd tripe.
This is to fire up the base. Because we need to make the "enemy" someone even more appetitizing to trounce on.

Time to get out the vote...
Oh, how pathetic.

 

I'll start with propaganda of the most biblical proportions. (see what I did there Plan9?) I don't believe that. Yes, the Bible. I have respect for others that do, but sorry it's the biggest steaming pile of bullshit on the planet.

When it comes to anything, it's don the critical thinking hat and figure out what is real and what is not.

 

I can't just let this float by.
Everyone has a right to his opinion, but there is no right to be wrong in matters of fact.

Troops (several thousand men) of Gen. Patton's Third Army were able to turn from attacking Eastward, pass through their own left flank, and attack to the North, all in less than 48 hours after being given the order to do so on 20 Dec 1944. Despite terrible weather conditions, on the afternoon of 26 December Company D, 37th Tank Battalion, 4th Armored Division, (Patton's troops) reached the perimeter of Bastogne, cracking the German siege. All of this is verifiable from dozens if not hundreds of primary sources. I don't want to threadjack, so I'll stop here.

Lindy