r/conspiracy: Proof Bin Laden Died in 2001.

Proof Bin Laden Died in 2001.

230 2014-07-15 by birthdaysuit11

In light of Sy Hersh's claim that the raid on Osama bin Laden in 2011 is "one big lie," here's an overview of evidence in support of an alternative narrative: bin Laden died in December 2001 in Tora Bora from a lung complication as a result of kidney failure starting at least since mid-2000.

All sources are from the mainstream media, many of which have since been "scrubbed" from the internet.

2000 to September 2001: Reports Emerge of bin Laden Dying From Kidney Disease

In March 2000 the Chicago Tribune reports that an Afghan witness and "Western intelligence official" say bin Laden is suffering from severe kidney and liver failure. Link: http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2000-03-25/news/0003250085_1_laden-bin-religious-militia

This story was also picked up by CBS News in 2000, who outright lead with the title that "Bin Laden Reported to be Dying" from "kidney disease."

Link: http://web.archive.org/web/20010212010328/http://www.cbsnews.com/now/story/0,1597,172666-412,00.shtml

In July 2001, the South Asia Analysis Group reports: "Bin Laden, who suffers from renal deficiency, has been periodically undergoing dialysis in a Peshawar military hospital with the knowledge and approval of the Inter-Services Intelligence, (ISI) if not of Gen.Pervez Musharraf himself." Link: http://web.archive.org/web/20011007021426/http://www.saag.org/papers3/paper266.html

September to November 2001: bin Laden is Trapped in Afghanistan, Unable to Receive Kidney Treatments

In September 2001, PBS' Frontline interviews the former general counsel for the CIA, mentioning reports from 1998 that the DEA found out Osama bin Laden was undergoing kidney dialysis with a doctor in Peshwar. They mention further that the DEA wanted to poison bin Laden through his dialysis machine, but the CIA allegedy rejected this due to the ban on assassinations.

Link: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/terrorism/interviews/smith.html In November 2001, The Guardian is reporting that French intelligence officials say bin Laden was flown to Dubai for kidney treatment in July of 2001, where he also met with several CIA agents and the head of Saudi intelligence. This story is also picked up by several French newspapers. Link: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/nov/01/afghanistan.terrorism In his first interview since 9/11, in November 2001 bin Laden talks to a Pakistani newspaper and claims that his "kidneys are all right" and denies visiting a hospital in Dubai the previous year (note that he may have visited one in Pakistan). In the same interview he also asserts, clearly lying, that he has "nuclear weapons." Link: http://dawn.com/news/5647/osama-claims-he-has-nukes-if-us-uses-n-arms-it-will-get-same-response/2

December 2001: bin Laden is Dead, Buried in Afghanistan In December of 2001, the New York Times reports on "high-level murmurings that bin Laden is dead." Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/26/international/asia/26LADE.html That same day,citing a Taliban source, Fox News reports that bin Laden has died due to an "untreated lung complication" from kidney disease. About 30 "close associates" reportedly attended bin Laden's funeral in the Tora Bora region of Afghanistan. A source concludes that the U.S. government and other forces are in a "mad search operation" but will never be able to locate the now-dead bin Laden, buried in an unmarked location. Link: http://www.foxnews.com/story/2001/12/26/report-bin-laden-already-dead/

Late December 2001 to March 2002: bin Laden's "Death Video" is Released In late December of 2001, after reports of bin Laden's funeral, a new video appears of a gaunt, sickly Osama bin Laden. The London Telegraph reports, verbatim: "The recording was dismissed by the Bush administration yesterday as sick propaganda possibly designed to mask the fact the al-Qa'eda leader was already dead." One aid further concludes that the video was created earlier in the event bin Laden is dead, who by December of 2001 was so heavily surrounded he would have been unable to escape to obtain kidney dialysis. Link: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/1366508/US-casts-doubt-on-bin-Ladens-latest-message.html At this time CBS news also runs a story on bin Laden receiving kidney disease treatments in Pakistan the week before 9/11. Link:Osama bin Laden Near Death in 2002 (from Dan Rather CBS); US Government bin Laden LIE In January of 2002, The Guardian reports that the president of Pakistan speculates that bin Laden is now dead of untreated kidney disease based on video and photographs of a gaunt-looking bin Laden. Link: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/jan/19/afghanistan.oliverburkeman In January of 2002, based on his analysis of video and photographs of bin Laden from December 2001, CNN's Dr. Sanjay Gupta says that bin Laden seems to be having renal failure. He notes kidney dialysis is expensive, and suggests bin Laden would need help in obtaining medical treatment. Link: http://edition.cnn.com/2002/HEALTH/01/21/gupta.otsc/ In March 2002, the BBC reports on an interview with bin Laden's wife, who speaks of bin Laden in the past tense, notes his failing kidney and frequent use of pills and other medicines. She says she has not seen her husband since September 2001, but holds out hope that he is still alive: "I feel deep inside me that he is still alive." She also notes that bin Laden's wish was to die in Afghanistan and nowhere else: "He never spoke to me about his intention to leave Afghanistan and always wished to die there. He told me once that if he ever left Afghanistan, it would be to meet his Creator." She also says that bin Laden "always suffered from kidney and stomach pains and that he "told me once that he was going to Pakistan for treatment." Link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/monitoring/media_reports/1871182.stm In March and April of 2002, U.S. officials downplay the threat of bin Laden, with Rumsfeld even saying the bin Laden threat has been "neutralized." Even Bush, called out for rarely mentioning bin Laden in 2002, admits: "We haven't heard from him [bin Laden] in a long time... I don't know where he is. I really just don't spend that much time on him, to be honest with you." Link: Bush: Truly not concerned about bin Laden (short version) In May 2002, ABC News reports on a new spliced-together tape from unknown time periods in which bin Laden appears "about the same" (that is, sickly-looking) as in the tape from December 2011. ABC News also says they have "learned intelligence reports indicate bin Laden had received a kidney transplant in Pakistan," but do not know when. Link: http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=79973&page=1

July 2002: FBI Chief Says bin Laden is Most Likely Dead; Nothing from bin Laden Since December 2001 In July 2002, the BBC reveals a bombshell: the FBI's counter-terrorism chief Dale Watson says bin Laden is '"probably dead." Conveniently, bin Laden's followers' claim that bin Laden will "not make more video statements until his group launches another attack on the United States." Link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/2135473.stm In July 2002, CNN reports that bin Laden's close bodyguards were captured in February of 2002, but not bin Laden. The article also quotes mentions some high-level officials: "Some high-level U.S. officials are already convinced by such evidence that bin Laden, who has not been seen or heard from in months, is dead." Link: http://web.archive.org/web/20021204040117/http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/07/30/binladen.son/ In July 2002, Time Magazine reports that "intelligence officials are not certain whether Osama bin Laden is alive or dead" but that "they have found a tantalizing document that suggests he was living at least as recently as the last days of December [of 2001]." Link: http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1002840,00.html In July 2002, The New York Times runs another article on how Osama bin Laden is likely dead. The author notes how unusual it would be for bin Laden, known for his constant desire for media attention, would be silent for over half a year. Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/11/opinion/the-death-of-bin-ladenism.html

October 2002: Intelligence Officials Confirm bin Laden is Dead; bin Laden's Will is Released Also in October 2002 the D.C.-based news service The World Tribune, citing Israeli intelligence sources, reports that the United States and Israel have concluded that bin Laden died in Afghanistan in December 2001. They note that additional bin Laden messages are "probably fabrications," and that bin Laden's heir has been chosen. Link: http://web.archive.org/web/20021205223313/http://216.26.163.62/2002/me_terrorism_10_16.html The president of Afghanistan also concludes that bin Laden is probably dead: "The more we don't hear of him, and the more time passes, there is the likelihood that he probably is either dead or seriously wounded somewhere." Link: http://edition.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/central/10/06/karzai.binladen/ In October 2002 CNN reports that U.S. intelligence officials have obtained Osama bin Laden's will, which is dated December 14, 2001 (approximately the same date as has been reported bin Laden's funeral in Tora Bora by Fox News and other outlets). CNN also reports that there has been no evidence of bin Laden since December of 2001. Link: http://edition.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/europe/10/26/binladen.will/

2002 Onwards: Efforts to Target bin Laden are Closed Down; bin Laden = "Elvis" In 2004, the LA Times quotes Donald Rumsfeld (who mixes up Hussein with bin Laden) as admitting: "We've not seen him [bin Laden] on a video since 2001." Link: http://newsmine.org/content.php?ol=9-11/binladen/death/rumsfeld-says-no-clues-to-bin-laden-since-2001.txt In 2006 the New York Times reports the CIA had officially closed down the unit focused on capturing bin Laden the previous year. Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/04/washington/04intel.html?ex=1309665600&en=3779ed9b98bb9d22&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss In 2006, U.S. and Pakistani officials say they have not received any information about bin Laden in years: "no tips from informants, no snippets from electronic intercepts, no points on any satellite image." The article rehashes the December 2001 video of bin Laden as the most recent evidence (other than a second-hand claim from 2003) of bin Laden's existence. Some commandos are now giving Osama bin Laden the codename "Elvis." Link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/09/AR2006090901105.html

The available reports overwhelmingly supports the view that bin Laden died of kidney failure in December of 2001. We have mainstream media reports from a variety of sources, and zero credible evidence since then, as admitted by top level offiicals. Even if you believe the official story, the evidence very strongly suggests some entity (either the CIA, Saudi Royal Family, the Pakistani government, or all the above) helped bin Laden survive long enough via medical treatments to be killed at a later point in time. This very well could be the "one big lie" Seymour Hersh has mentioned in The Guardian recently.

162 comments

94 bandy0154 2014-07-15

This is why the movie Zero Dark Thirty was released so quickly after his supposed death in 2011. Nothing to back up a story in the US quite like a blockbuster based on "true events".

55 Shillyourself 2014-07-15

Nailed it. Revisionist history works, that's why they use it.

18 Eurotrashie 2014-07-15

The movie was partially funded directly by the CIA. That should tell you something.

7 morningredbird 2014-07-15

Damn, and I really liked that movie. Didn't even think of this possibility at the time... What the hell is actually real today?!

23 bandy0154 2014-07-15

Everything that comes from the mainstream media is in question these days. Investigative journalism is dead.

3 [deleted] 2014-07-15

[deleted]

1 bandy0154 2014-07-15

Are they mainstream?

1 [deleted] 2014-07-15

[deleted]

5 bandy0154 2014-07-15

Ok, so maybe investigative journalism isn't completely dead, but it's nowhere to be found in the mainstream.

0 lastresort08 2014-07-15

Don't forget /r/BenSwann or /r/JudgeNapolitano. They are both great reliable sources for information.

2 hzane 2014-07-15

Editorialization is NOT information.

1 lastresort08 2014-07-15

Posts made by Ben Swann directly is not editorialized. Judge Nap tends to give a good interpretation and explanation for his reasons, that are not leaning left or right. I would say that's good reason to listen to both of them.

Also StormCloudsGathering.

1 5yearsinthefuture 2014-07-15

It was merely allowed. The press is for those that can afford it.

1 RufinTheFury 2014-07-15

If that the case then why trust any of the links OP provided?

2 Nutrig 2014-07-15

Yeah it's a real shame that it was such a fucking good movie. I was very disappointed after watching it to find out that it was bollocks. The torture scenes were hugely exagerated to make it seem like torture was a vital part of tracking down Bin Laden, basically to make it seem like less of a shitty thing to be doing. Also apparently the tactics used in that incredible final showdown weren't really accurate.

I suppose it's still possible to thoroughly enjoy the movie if viewed entirely as a piece of fiction though. Really well staged film.

1 platinum_peter 2014-07-15

As soon as I heard about the movie I connected the dots that it was produced just to perpetuate the lie of the raid and his real death.

7 DontTreadOnMe16 2014-07-15

I remember hearing that Zero Dark Thirty was in production BEFORE Osama was even killed... I never thought anything more about that until now. If they were able to anticipate his "death", then they could start production prior, and then release the movie very soon after the event.

2 bandy0154 2014-07-15

Ya that's pretty much what happened.

3 devolka 2014-07-15

It's not what happened. The production was in development and was about the HUNT for him when he died and the production changed direction but at that point it was still only in development.

0 bandy0154 2014-07-15

Sure man, whatever you say.

1 jarjartwinks 2014-07-15

well, the story was going to be about the battle of tora bora, at first.

6 Contrary_mma_hipster 2014-07-15

Kind of like that flight 93 movie.

3 bandy0154 2014-07-15

Exactly.

4 FrankP3893 2014-07-15

Honestly I just assumed it was true, first time I've read or seen anything contradict it.

2 womans_unclean_loins 2014-07-15

Good on you for saying that. When I read your comment I just though, in a completely non-negative way, what different worlds we live in. I remember, must have been 2003, reading a translation of a German article about his death, and I (like the FBI) never believed he was involved in the 9-11 demolitions.

This is a good read, just part of many people's framework:

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/galleryoffakebinladens.php

1 ImASharkImAShark 2014-07-15

A ruling by a US court of law and the FBI does indeed state that bin Laden had absolutely no involvement with 9/11.

It's also quite a "coincidence" that most or all of the SEAL Team Six members involved in the raid are dead now.

1 bandy0154 2014-07-15

It's also quite a "coincidence" that most or all of the SEAL Team Six members involved in the raid are dead now.

Goes to show how much TPTB care about their ground forces, serve your country and get murdered in return to keep crucial information safe.

-15 [deleted] 2014-07-15

[deleted]

7 FrankP3893 2014-07-15

Thanks, score one me. In all serious though I didn't question it because I didn't give a fuck. If you asked me if it was true I wouldn't have stood by it, I wouldn't form a real opinion at all without researching the topic myself.

6 hzane 2014-07-15

And now that you have seen something on reddit better fully believe that.

1 WadeWilsonforPope 2014-07-15

Just so everyone knows dont be this guy. If someone here is showing genuine interest and hasnt heard of something before just give your two cents explination or point them to more resources (Not really necessary here OP made a solid post)

0 [deleted] 2014-07-15

or they wanted to make money

2 bandy0154 2014-07-15

Can't it be both?

-3 [deleted] 2014-07-15

So are you saying the screenwriter was "one of them" or the director or the editors? Like I do't even get what you are saying. Filming the movie is the easiest and quickest part.. like they made a movie to what? Convince us? The movie didn't convince anyone. Anyone who would be convinced by the movie would have been convinced anyway.

9 ToastyRyder 2014-07-15

Depictions in popular media do inform public opinion, this is why the US Military has an office dedicated solely to instructing Hollywood on their representations: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/17/act-of-valor-military-hollywood_n_1284338.html

http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=516

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/hollywood-and-the-pentagon/

2 ImASharkImAShark 2014-07-15

It's almost as if political/Rothschild Zionists that claim to be "Jewish" (they'll hide behind that religion in part to denounce people that call them out or criticise them as "anti-Semites") even also run most of the MSM and high Hollywood positions, oh wait...

8 bandy0154 2014-07-15

That's exactly what I am saying, and yes most people in this country are dumb enough for a Hollywood film to convince them that a story is real.

38 Coltzu 2014-07-15

They mention further that the DEA wanted to poison bin Laden through his dialysis machine, but the CIA allegedy rejected this due to the ban on assassinations.

Right, and if you believe that I got a bridge I'd love to sell you

7 bandy0154 2014-07-15

A ban on assassinations? That's a good one!

3 yoyoyo_its_me 2014-07-15

isn't this sort of phrasing used for something that is impossible to complete. As in, "If you believe that, then I've got some ocean front property in Nebraska I'd like to sell you." It's not implausible that a person could own a bridge, albeit a small bridge.

8 CaptScarbridge 2014-07-15

The saying stems from a man falsely selling the Brooklyn Bridge a couple times.

I'd link, but mobile.

2 Aurvandel 2014-07-15

There's a story that the Saudis did poison bin Laden through his dialysis machine.

I knew part of this story from other sources. Osama had a problem with his kidneys, which explains his sallow, almost yellow complexion. Years ago, the Saudi intelligence service donated two kidney dialysis machines to the Taliban. One was for the major hospital in Kabul, which is still in use. The other was for Osama’s personal use. Only, Osama’s kidney machine was rigged. Instead of curing him, it was slowly poisoning him. Osama figured out what was happening, and fled to Iran for medical care. The Saudis fired their intelligence chief for his failure to get rid of Osama.

20 uhvilleuh 2014-07-15

So why wouldn't someone in one of Osama's organizations just come out and say he died years ago? I understand that they wouldn't be believed but it'd be an opportunity to kind of stick it to America. In a weird way. You guys make my head hurt lol.

14 dtrainescobar 2014-07-15

Theyre funded and set up by the US government, why would they want to bite the hand that feeds them? ISIS is the same way, there was a website for ISIS which got it to the point they tried to change it to ISIL, or whatever the fuck it is now.

2 RufinTheFury 2014-07-15

So let me connect all year dots for ya:

US wants a false flag operation and hires their old mujahideen buddies to do it. For some reason they accept.

Then we get about 2000 people to participate in the effort to stage 9/11 successfully, enact the plan, and declare Al-Qaeda the culprits.

Now enemies to literally everybody, Al-Qaeda gets beat to hell after being invaded by the US and friends in their own home-land.

Through all of this no one spills the beans.

Meanwhile Osama died in 2001 but the rest of Al-Qaeda leadership decide to keep him as a figurehead for the organization anyway.

Now it present day, Al-Qaeda is on its last legs, and they still won't admit that 9/11 was nothing more than a hit ordered by the US government. Because money is worth seeing all their friends dead and their homelands turned into wastelands ruled over by their now-enemies. And it's been like this for 13 years.

Sorry, that's one conspiracy I can't buy.

6 dtrainescobar 2014-07-15

It sounds to me that you dont understand what is happening on a deeper level. "Al qaeda" is merely the CIA, any of the highest ranking people of the organization are CIA, same goes for ISIS. These are all part of a grand design which has webs all across the globe and obviously goes further than you can imagine.

2 BeastAP23 2014-07-15

Why didn't anyone say Osama is dead? I mean, anyone.

1 birthdaysuit11 2014-07-15

I completely understand that.

2 TomSwirly 2014-07-15

But that isn't the story that's being told here.

Indeed, what OP has documented is entirely consistent with everything about 9/11 being "as described" EXCEPT that Bin Laden died not so long afterward - because it doesn't talk about what happened before and on 9/11.

2 RufinTheFury 2014-07-15

Then why wouldn't they reveal that he was dead already after Seal Team Six "took him down?"

Then America looks stupid for chasing a ghost and never leaning he was dead for over a decade, and we just killed some innocent man and our Navy Seals couldn't tell that it wasn't Osama. We just look ridiculous and AQ looks more powerful.

And even if America knew that Osama was dead the whole time too we couldn't then say "well yeah we knew" because then we become world stage liars. Not a good look.

1 steve0suprem0 2014-07-15

Last legs? When did you last watch the news?

3 RufinTheFury 2014-07-15

Okay, so now we're back to trusting the news? I'm confused, do we trust the media or not?

Also, the LIFG completely dropped support for Al-Qaeda, Bin Laden himself was worried about its unpopularity, ISIS is overtaking them, only 10% of Saudi Arabians support them theologically, and they really have not done much as of 2014. They've attacked a border and an airport and they still hold Fallujah, but they've basically just been licking their wounds.

And regardless of whether they're about to fail or not, they've still taken a whipping. Why would they not have spoken out already?

2 steve0suprem0 2014-07-15

Oh jesus. Do you think the media are making up the atrocities?

0 RufinTheFury 2014-07-15

Well, from this very thread:

http://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/2asd8y/proof_bin_laden_died_in_2001/ciym87b

15 upvotes. And this is /r/conspiracy where people are dedicated to finding the truth that is covered up by government/media lies, so when can I trust it and when can I not? It seems to wildly fluctuate based on whether or not it supports one's argument.

And seriously, why wouldn't Al-Qaeda speak up already? I can think of only one scenario where they wouldn't: AQ's leadership is making big money from the US gov still and they haven't told any of their foot soldiers the truth and are fine watching them die. The flaw with that, of course, is that we've killed a LOT of AQ higher ups to the point that I think it's mostly new blood running the organization.

2 TomSwirly 2014-07-15

And seriously, why wouldn't Al-Qaeda speak up already?

Why would they? How is it to their advantage? Surely it's much more advantageous to them to have this mythic figure, this criminal mastermind that the US couldn't ever catch? Surely having Bin Laden "still alive" would take the heat off whoever was the actual boss?

2 RufinTheFury 2014-07-15

Except for the part where now that we've "killed OBL" it would be the PERFECT time to tell very one that he had been dead for years.

The US looks ridiculous for chasing a dead man for over a decade, they just killed an innocent man, and AQ can now say they've not lost any of their great masterminds because they'd been living without him for years.

2 disturbed434 2014-07-15

Yeah, that makes logical sense. However, what if Al Qaeda never actually existed and Osama was just an extremist who the government rated as the most wanted man and saying that he was part of an extremist group called "Al Qaeda"--which they made up?

Just to throw this out there, "Al Qaeda" means "The Base" in English.

2 TomSwirly 2014-07-15

Because it started as a fundraising database. That's one of the details which I always felt was completely legit

2 TomSwirly 2014-07-15

So why wouldn't someone in one of Osama's organizations just come out and say he died years ago?

That's a reasonable question, but why would it be to their advantage? As long as he was alive, he was "the man the US couldn't catch" - his existence spread fear to Al Qaeda's enemies and must have been a huge fund raising feature.

-6 [deleted] 2014-07-15

because he died in the raid

2 TomSwirly 2014-07-15

Pictures? Videos? Any hard evidence at all? No?

Your answer is equivalent to, "Believe what the government tells you whether or not they have any evidence." I tend to be on the skeptical side of conspiracy theory and I get a lot of flak here for it, but in this case there is simply no evidence at all for the government's story, and I'm not willing to take anyone's world on trust.

1 [deleted] 2014-07-15

No because AQ said he did too. Why would they lie? WHy would pakistan lie?

16 [deleted] 2014-07-15

Seal Team Six said they killed a young guy with a black beard.

Osama was an old guy with a grey beard.

After killing the guy, they asked some kid if the dead guy's name is Osama and the kid said "yeah."

14 wooskies 2014-07-15

Lol. "This boy said its it him sweet! Lets go!"

No.

12 itsfreedomstupid 2014-07-15

Do you have the source for this? I missed this recount of the event.

3 [deleted] 2014-07-15

don't know the guy's name but he's the guy who spoke out and was later criticized for it. I think he wrote a book.

SEAL Team Six: Memoirs of an Elite Navy SEAL Sniper Book by Howard E. Wasdin and Stephen Templin

5 jgiampaolo70 2014-07-15

A SEAL wrote a book called No Easy Day. he has been shunned by the SEALS and the Gov't for writing it, but he was wise enough to have legal council verify he did not relate any top secret info.

In the book he claims the dead man had a dark beard but that they found a box of hair dye in the bathroom.

For what it is worth.

1 womans_unclean_loins 2014-07-15

the kid said "Let's Roll!!... oh, what was it.. oh.... 'yeah'..."

-1 Evaus 2014-07-15

Nice source dog. I heard Osama is still alive and seal team six killed marky mark

1 [deleted] 2014-07-15

"SEAL Team Six: Memoirs of an Elite Navy SEAL Sniper" Book by Howard E. Wasdin and Stephen Templin

1 Evaus 2014-07-15

a seal sniper http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/00/Common_Seal_Phoca_vitulina.jpg kek

13 jetpackswasyes 2014-07-15

What about his three wives that were in the compound? They were known to the public for decades before 2011, they gave interviews after the raid claiming he was killed in 2011 and are easily identifiable.

12 Sgt_carbonero 2014-07-15

What about the newer footage uncovered of him from the evidence obtained from the raid? It showed him watching some recent news broadcast that kind of cemented the time frame from what I remember?

4 [deleted] 2014-07-15

[deleted]

4 Sgt_carbonero 2014-07-15

No. Not that one.

1 Ohhrubyy 2014-07-15

Well find a link! Lets see!

2 Sgt_carbonero 2014-07-15

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/osama-bin-laden-home-videos-released-pentagon/story?id=13552384

3 Ohhrubyy 2014-07-15

Yeah, Obama was on his tv. Thanks for supplying that link! Hmm, maybe the real Osama died in 2001 and was replaced (by his own people or ours)..nah. I'm gonna go with /u/sgt_carbonero here and agree he was probably alive, or someone parent trapped in a duplicate Osama, until he died sometime after 2010.

9 muffalettadiver 2014-07-15

Does no one remember the news reports? Fuck! Everyone in the country had a vested interest in his death and then it got reported (but not sensationalized) and the dumb populous went back to sleep. 'They' figured this out and used it again as a ploy for politics again whenever Osama was killed again. Or it was a test (kind of like the dumb ass bush presidency) to see if we truly were asleep.

2 RufinTheFury 2014-07-15

Wait, so do we trust the news or not? I'm new to this sub and seems to fluctuate wildly from "don't trust anything the media/government says!" to "Don't you remember those news reports/government press conferences?"

2 wetwater 2014-07-15

That's relatively easy: you choose to trust the news or not based if it fits your agenda/preconceived notions.

3 costabius 2014-07-15

Media sources publishing unconfirmed reports as fact that later proved to be incorrect????? How mysterious...

-3 [deleted] 2014-07-15

As a physician, can confirm that bin laden died of renal failure.

4 womans_unclean_loins 2014-07-15

As a skateboarder I can confirm that he wasn't too good at the half pipe but did like to cruise around town when stoned.

0 costabius 2014-07-15

I didn't know Bin Laden's personal physician was on reddit, Or were you the pathologist who did the autopsy?

3 Amos_Quito 2014-07-15

Nice work, /u/birthdaysuit11.

EDIT: I'm still convinced that these people in the White House were watching "snuff porn".

Hillary can barely contain her drooling.

3 RDS 2014-07-15

didn't it come out that that particular photo was completely staged?

4 [deleted] 2014-07-15

source?

1 RDS 2014-07-15

Sorry I phrased that somewhat wrong.

I'll link a news article when I'm home from work, but there was a 25 minute black out during the raid so this photo was not of them actually watching anything go down. So not staged in the sense that it's completely fake, but staged to make it look like they are all watching/giving orders from some type of situation room when they had almost no idea of what was happening during the time when they supposedly killed bin Laden.

edit: http://www.aim.org/don-irvine-blog/deception-situation-room-photo-staged-2/

3 Amos_Quito 2014-07-15

It was altered by a Ultra Orthodox newspaper:

New York Times: Newspaper ‘Regrets’ Erasing Hillary Clinton

A newspaper catering to ultra-Orthodox Jews in New York apologized on Monday for publishing a photograph of the White House Situation Room during the raid on Osama bin Laden’s compound that was digitally altered to make it seem as if Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and another female official had not been present.

Here is the altered version.

And previously by the White House:

the White House acknowledged there that it had already altered the photograph before releasing it. A note in the Flickr caption explains that “a classified document seen in this photograph has been obscured.” (Incidentally, because of the blurring of that document, on the computer to Mrs. Clinton’s right, The Times, which has a policy against printing any altered images, initially hesitated to publish this image at all.)

2 [deleted] 2014-07-15

If anyone believes the story that they went through all the trouble of catching him and then dumped his body in the ocean, you are truly stupid and blind.

2 fangs- 2014-07-15

The point was to get rid of him. What were they supposed to do? Put his body up on the White House lawn as a scarecrow? Openly showing pictures of the body would have only provoked more attacks on the US and it would not have achieved anything. If they had released pictures, conspiracy theorists would simply say they were fake just like they did with any photographic/video evidence of 9/11.

2 tedcorp 2014-07-15

Makes sense. Why did we get to see Hussein's legs swing and twitch in the air but for some reason Osama gets burial at sea? The fuck.

Didn't buy it then and still don't.

4 [deleted] 2014-07-15

Why didn't the thousands of people in his organisation call us out and tell us he died years ago? Why wouldn't they embarrass us? Both AQ and Pakistan said he died

1 Ambiguously_Ironic 2014-07-15

You know what the former Pakistani Prime Minister had to say on the subject, right? Before she was assassinated that is.

1 [deleted] 2014-07-15

Ok so why in the fucking HELL would AQ tell the world he was killed in the raid... why wouldn't they well I dont know.. call us on our lie? So why in the hell do you think the first statement is the truth but all the others are the lie?

2 slippery_people 2014-07-15

the CIA allegedy rejected this due to the ban on assassinations

lol

0 f0k4ppl3 2014-07-15

allegedy

2 Sek101 2014-07-15

the US Administration wouldn't release any evidence of his death after a decade of sacrifice. Did he die of kidney failure in 2001? It's just as likely considering lack of evidence supporting otherwise. But I digress,

The HIJACKERS were not osama bin laden. Nor are all the changes that we've witnessed since then. Call their bluff, demand proof, deny stupid excuses and false narratives.

What about that super stealth tail rotor that separated from the helicopter during raid? Remember that? Think that was something other than a catastrophic failure? The official story of osama's fate is weak, that is for sure.

2 [deleted] 2014-07-15

Yeah it is called a crash

1 Sek101 2014-07-15

Yep.

0 [deleted] 2014-07-15

Ok.. and are you saying it wasn't a stealth chopper? Because China sure as hell did as they came and looked at it and took it away.

1 Sek101 2014-07-15

I believe it was, but mentioned it because I think the crash was more serious, some locals in the area recounted the same. In other words I haven't seen evidence of a successful bin laden raid.

1 [deleted] 2014-07-15

Pakistan, AQ, and bin ladens family members saying he was killed isn't enough? Like... um ok. Well ok

1 Sek101 2014-07-15

bin laden's family is the most solid hearsay, but that's all there was. the previous President demonstrated to the people that he captured/killed his hvts - All obama could offer was a "liberty and justice" speech and a sketchy story about a dumping at sea...

2 ridestraight 2014-07-15

birthdaysuit11, your take on Bhutto's claims prior to her assassination?

2 onceuponapriori 2014-07-15

Not sure what claims you are referring to, but perhaps you have in mind that clip where she says that Omar Saeed Sheik murdered Osama bin Laden?

IMO, it is pretty obvious that she meant to say "Omar Sheikh, the man who murdered Daniel Pearl" (that being the only way the average member of a Western audience watching the show would recognize the name "Omar Saeed Sheikh", whether accurate or not).

It was a slip of the tongue.

She had, just two minutes earlier, mentioned Hamza bin Laden, so the "bin Laden" name was definitely on her mind. The interviewer seemed to agree that it was a slip of the tongue, as indicated by the fact that he didn't bother to stop to ask for any details on what would have been a massively groundbreaking story, if the statement was intentional.

Benazir (someone I really respect, despite her flaws) also repeatedly referred to bin Laden as alive in the months leading up to that interview (in August, September and October of 2007, the Frost interview was in November 2, 2007). But Omar Saeed Sheikh had been in prison since 2002, so it's hard to believe that she really thought he was responsible for bin Laden's death..

Far more importantly, she referred to bin Laden as alive AFTER the Frost interview (e.g., in an interview on November 9, 2007, and another on November 13, 2007).

From my vantage point, this is yet another example of conspiracy advocates insisting that we should accept one claim as gospel truth, when it supports their viewpoint, while dismissing multiple other claims by the same person, before and after, that serve as evidence against their position. Why are they so prepared to accept that specific claim, and so eager to dismiss all of the others? There is a perfectly reasonable explanation for her anomalous statement, which, if intentional, was made with inexplicably no fanfare whatsoever. What is the similarly reasonable explanation that explains all of her contradictory statements?

Bhutto faced at least two assassination attempts, including one in the months before the Frost interview. So I think it's bizarre for folks to assume that her death was the result of a reprisal assassination by the CIA, at least on the basis of the video I think you have in mind.

1 ridestraight 2014-07-15

Thank you for the reply. I'll save this and go back over the information.

2 roc420 2014-07-15

Buried at sea?

2 BobNoel 2014-07-15

His family even posted an obituary in the newspaper.

2 undesirabledesires 2014-07-15

It's also possible that the US realized much later that Osama died in 2001, and figured they had to stage his death because otherwise the country would be in an uproar. The US spent so much time and effort trying to catch this guy, and if this guy really died in 2001, all that time and effort seems like a waste and the US government would have a lot of explaining to do. Oh, and Obama would never have gotten re-elected. Remember how much they talked up "We caught Osama!" during his election?

Regardless, I do think that the release of Zero Dark Thirty's release time was carefully planned.

2 f0k4ppl3 2014-07-15

Is there a theory as to the reason for covering up Bin Laden's death until many years later? Coalition forces remained in Afghanistan after the official story was published. That makes me think that they really did not need the hunt for OBL as an excuse to continue military ops. Then also, wouldn't the previous administration jump at the chance back in '01 to take credit for 'disposing' of the most wanted man in history? Seem Bush and Co. would have loved that.

I'm actually very inclined to believe OBL did pass away in '01, but what is the purpose of keeping it black until 2011?

2 TomSwirly 2014-07-15

Now, this is what I come here to see.

I'm not entirely sure of your timeframe - some of those early Bin Laden videos are clearly of him and mention events that were current at the time - but it seems quite possible that he was long dead before Mr. Obama took over in 200o8...

2 drgreedy911 2014-07-15

This is interesting and well put together. That is quite an array of credible opinion that he died in 2001.

But if the person killed as bin laden in Pakistan was not bin laden, what about the wives. The wives will really know who he is. This would be hard to cover up.

1 gizadog 2014-07-15

The public bought the org story! It will be tough to go back now.

1 monkeydonut13 2014-07-15

If he died in 2001, then how the fuck did we kill him again 10 years later? Or was that just enough time to get everybodies minds off of his death in 2001? So most of these links are from the media, and the media is known for being government fed, so why in the hell would media facts be facts at all? Either way one of the deaths were staged (no shit). I find it hard to believe that he died in 2001 and in 2011 his death was staged, then again I find it hard that his death could have been staged in 2001 and he kept quiet all that time. What if both deaths were staged and here in a couple years the CIA says they capped the wrong guy because bin Laden just made another terorrist video and captured 15 American soldiers and 3 British journalist... crazy shit man... crazy.

EDIT: spelling

1 lastyegg 2014-07-15

I'm inclined to believe this evidence, but thats kind of because I WANT this to be true. I think that would be a really exciting twist, and I'm worried that clouds my judgement on the topic.

Isn't it possible that he was flown to receive top-notch medical attention somewhere, saving his life, in return for some sort of deal where he plays the boogeyman character? It's no secret his family and some US oligarchical families were business partners...maybe they worked out some sort of deal. Just a thought.

2 birthdaysuit11 2014-07-15

"Even if you believe the official story, the evidence very strongly suggests some entity (either the CIA, Saudi Royal Family, the Pakistani government, or all the above) helped bin Laden survive long enough via medical treatments to be killed at a later point in time."

1 bhjit 2014-07-15

What would be the reason to report him dead again after the raid?

0 slapded 2014-07-15

So you use these news links to show "proof" he died in 2001. If you think news is such a conspiracy, you don't help yourself much by using idess from news sources. Unless you were there i can without a doubt tell you to fuck off

-1 thc1967 2014-07-15

I see a lot of "we haven't seen him"... "we haven't heard from him"... and not a lot of "we have what is clearly proof of his death - like a body".

If the US government were doing its damndest to put a bullet in your brain, you'd make yourself as invisible as you could, too, right?

21 lyyphe23 2014-07-15

Ok we killed him! Now what??

Let's toss his body into the ocean!

Of course! That's what we ALWAYS do!

-4 thc1967 2014-07-15

That's exactly what you do when you don't want his burial site to become a shrine.

25 lyyphe23 2014-07-15

Or if you don't want to produce a non existent body. Both great explanations.

18 OnSpeakerCrab 2014-07-15

From the OP:

A source concludes that the U.S. government and other forces are in a "mad search operation" but will never be able to locate the now-dead bin Laden, buried in an unmarked location. Link: http://www.foxnews.com/story/2001/12/26/report-bin-laden-already-dead/[8]

If the Taliban themselves didn't want people to be able to find his body, why the fuck would his "burial site becoming a shrine" ever happen? It wouldn't. It's fucking propaganda you heard and said, "that sounds like it could happen" and never fucking questioned it.

0 riskoooo 2014-07-15

Except it's against Islam to worship false idols, and fundamentalists are certainly going to abide by that.

4 Rockran 2014-07-15

Killing the innocent is also against Islam, yet the fundies don't abide by that?

5 riskoooo 2014-07-15

Touche.

0 Sabremesh 2014-07-15

Jesus, the crap you come out with..

-1 thc1967 2014-07-15

I'm sorry that rational thoughts are challenging for you.

I can tell that because your response offered no rational argument to contradict that simple statement... nor any argument at all.

3 Sabremesh 2014-07-15

You clearly know nothing about Sunni Islam or the specific tenets of Wahhabism. The argument justifying the "burial at sea" is based on based on pure, unadulterated ignorance.

2 womans_unclean_loins 2014-07-15

I agree with Sabremesh. You an Afghanistan burial expert and a shill?

0 thc1967 2014-07-15

Shill? Anyone who challenges you to think or asks questions, which based on your brilliant responses are obviously too difficult to answer rationally, is automatically a shill?

3 kit8642 2014-07-15

This is how I see it, he either died back in 2001, which a lot of CIA have thought, or he was moved to Pakistan and his whereabouts were known. I always thought it was interesting that the Government lied about his super evil mountain fortress, which he would need if he had a dialysis machine. But, as MSM tells us, he some how snuck out of Afghanistan and was hiding in Pakistan. The question would be, how would he have gotten to that house with a dialysis machine? I know it would probably been a lot easier if the US Government let Pakistan fly cargo planes in to Afghanistan and air lift foreign fighters (members of Al Qaeda and the Taliban) out months after 9/11. But that would never happen right? Right?

By the way, I have questioned Bin Laden's death as soon as it happened. Example 1, Example 2

-1 thc1967 2014-07-15

A lot of what you say hinges upon the requirement of a dialysis machine, which would not be needed if he had found a way to obtain a kidney transplant, right?

-1 kit8642 2014-07-15

Not necessarily, I personally think if he was still alive and was actually living in Pakistan, he was probably transported out through the air lift of evil. The Government made up his mountain fortress for pure propaganda and to sensationalize the situation for the masses. As for his assassination, the only evidence I have ever seen argued, was that his wife was there, which isn't enough evidence for me.

-3 Shillyourself 2014-07-15

Always the same accounts denying what seems to be obvious to nearly everyone else...weird.

1 bitbytebit 2014-07-15

yeah but I don't think they are shills in the true sense of the word. Just useful idiots with limited intelligence. The perfect citizen

-1 thc1967 2014-07-15

Article title says "proof". Generally "proof" of a death requires a body. Body of post does not provide a body or any evidence thereof.

I haven't seen or heard from a bunch of people I went to high school with in years. Does that mean they're dead?

-1 Epicsharkduck 2014-07-15

is this a joke?

2 womans_unclean_loins 2014-07-15

We call it "information".

7 Epicsharkduck 2014-07-15

that's a weird way of saying joke but I guess it's fitting for a conspiracy theorist

4 totes_meta_bot 2014-07-15

This thread has been linked to from elsewhere on reddit.

[/r/rekt] Conspiracy Theorist Rekt

^If ^you ^follow ^any ^of ^the ^above ^links, ^respect ^the ^rules ^of ^reddit ^and ^don't ^vote ^or ^comment. ^Questions? ^Abuse? ^Message ^me ^here.

2 Eauylon 2014-07-15

The one thing that makes me take this seriously, besides the sources the OP lists above that your can feel free to check out yourself...is the fact bin laden had dialysis in 2000, and then supposedly lived for 11 more years?!

That would be an insane medical miracle! You do NOT get dialysis for kidney failure due to chronic disease and live 11 years. Doctors might tell you 3-5 years, for 90% of people in that situation they have 2-3 years. But nope, he must have had magic muslim-terrorist powers to live with kidney failure for over a fucking decade and our politicians have told us he just happened to be killed right before a presidential election. Yup, I'm sure that's the truth...after all, our government has never lies and exists merely for peace and prosperity of its citizens, right fellow patriot??

0 womans_unclean_loins 2014-07-15

of course you are correct, but the truth is irrelevant to the 9-11 propaganda charade.

-1 Eauylon 2014-07-15

Oh America, where NOT believing in impossible medical miracles happening to terrorists makes you unpatriotic.

-3 furrowsmiter 2014-07-15

This pretty much explained everything I needed to know: http://tundratabloids.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/hoax-Osama-bin-Laden-dead-pic.jpg. Any question the photo of his dead body is a fake?

7 [deleted] 2014-07-15

LOL, that's pretty funny (and sad that people bought it at face value).

1 D3ntonVanZan 2014-07-15

So, who is the guy in the middle?

1 Ohhrubyy 2014-07-15

The guy who is actually dead. They just 'shopped bin ladin's mouth and beard on that man.

1 D3ntonVanZan 2014-07-15

Is there a source on this or was this just a Photoshop job? Where'd the middle photo come from?

1 womans_unclean_loins 2014-07-15