PNE Online
Welcome to PNE-Online. Why not register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox! You can also join up as a forum Patron to help support in the running costs of the forum.

Bin Laden raid book to be released Sept 11

deany

0
Patron
Joined
Dec 30, 2007
Messages
14,361
Location
Sunny Preston
No doubt it will be a short book, perhaps only a couple of pages? I wonder if it will have the decency to mention the previous times we were told he had died too? there must have been at least 7 prior ones!

osama-bin-laden-scuba-diving.jpg


Anyway above is my take on it, below here's the story..... (PS I bolded a couple of blatent red flag bits)

Navy SEAL's book will describe raid that killed bin Laden

A detailed first-person account of the raid that killed Osama bin Laden, written under a pseudonym by a member of the Navy SEALs who participated in the mission and was present at bin Laden’s death, will be released next month, the publisher said on Wednesday.
The book, “No Easy Day: The Firsthand Account of the Mission That Killed Osama bin Laden,” which is scheduled to be released on Sept. 11, has been a tightly held secret at the publisher, Penguin. It promises to be one of the biggest books of the year, with the potential to affect the presidential campaign in the final weeks before the election.
The author’s name will be listed as Mark Owen by Dutton, an imprint of Penguin. For security reasons, he used a pseudonym and changed the names of other SEAL members.

A former member of SEAL Team 6, the author was a team leader in the operation that resulted in the death of Bin Laden in Abbottabad, Pakistan, on May 2, 2011. According to a description of the book provided by the publisher, the author gives a “blow-by blow narrative of the assault, beginning with the helicopter crash that could have ended Owen’s life straight through to the radio call confirming Bin Laden’s death,” and is “an essential piece of modern history.”
Penguin officials would not say to what extent the book was vetted by government agencies. Colonel Tim Nye, the chief spokesman for the military’s Special Operations Command, said he would reserve comment until he had an opportunity to read the book.
The author also recalls his childhood in Alaska, his grueling preparation to become a member of the SEALs and other previously unreported SEAL missions. He completed 13 combat deployments since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and retired within the last year.
A co-writer, Kevin Maurer, is the author of four books and was embedded with Special Forces in Afghanistan six times.

The book could get caught up in the politically charged arena of the presidential campaign. That’s what happened with another planned narrative account of the raid, a film by Kathryn Bigelow and Mark Boal, “Zero Dark Thirty.” That film was originally scheduled for release in October, but was moved to December after Republicans said it would help dramatize one of the president’s signature achievements right before the election. The project also prompted complaints from some Republicans that the administration had provided improper access about the raid to the filmmakers, a charge the White House denied.
In August 2011, The New Yorker published an account of the raid that was so detailed it included information about what the pilot of a Black Hawk helicopter was thinking as the aircraft was on the verge of crashing. That article relied on interviews with officials who had debriefed members of the SEALs team, not with the individuals themselves.

Bookstores were first given a few clues about the book last month. One independent bookstore owner said in July that she was told only that Dutton had added a “big, major book” written by an anonymous author to its fall list.
Members of Dutton’s sales staff were given a detailed description of the book during a conference call with executives on Wednesday.
The publisher is expecting a major best seller, with a planned print run of 300,000 copies in hardcover, according to a person familiar with the plans.
Because the book is written under a pseudonym, the author will appear in disguise during television interviews to promote the book. At least one major network prime-time appearance has been planned, a person familiar with the plans said, and during interviews on television and radio, the author’s voice will be altered.
Thom Shanker contributed reporting from Washington.
This article, “Navy SEAL's Book Will Describe Raid That Killed Bin Laden,” first appeared in The New York Times.
 
No doubt it will be a short book, perhaps only a couple of pages? I wonder if it will have the decency to mention the previous times we were told he had died too? there must have been at least 7 prior ones!

I don`t know what media you read....(well, ok, I do)....but as far as most of us are concerned, he was just killed the once.

Bin Laden`s a funny one..I remember reading about a US poll in which many thought he had been killed years before...and many believe he had never existed. And it was the SAME people who believed BOTH simultaneously...

Which camp are YOU in Deany?

Dead or Alive? Existed..or Never existed? Shot on the US raid, or still alive and being held in secret?

`All of the above` is not an option I`m allowing you, bud...;)
 
Last edited:
I don`t know what media you read....(well, ok, I do)....but as far as most of us are concerned, he was just killed the once.

Bin Laden`s a funny one..I remember reading about a US poll in which many thought he had been killed years before...and many believe he had never existed. And it was the SAME people who believed BOTH simultaneously...

Which camp are YOU in Deany?

Dead or Alive? Existed..or Never existed? Shot on the US raid, or still alive and being held in secret?

`All of the above` is not an option I`m allowing you, bud...;)

lol,

Ok, he existed, he died, but much earlier than the Obama fairy tale in my opinion.

President Bhutto of Pakistan had some interesting things to say about his "earlier death" when David Frost interviewed her for Al Jazeera for starters, and I do mean for starters.

Frankly, And I mean this without wishing to offend anyone, I'm amazed anyone Believed the Obama announcement and took it seriously.
 
lol,

Ok, he existed, he died, but much earlier than the Obama fairy tale in my opinion.

President Bhutto of Pakistan had some interesting things to say about his "earlier death" when David Frost interviewed her for Al Jazeera for starters, and I do mean for starters.

Frankly, And I mean this without wishing to offend anyone, I'm amazed anyone Believed the Obama announcement and took it seriously.

Who really cares when he died, the good thing is, he's dead...right?
 
Disagree,

If I lost a loved one on 9/11 I would have wanted the opportunity of a trial myself, the families never got that and never will now in relation to him.

With all due respect, you didn't lose a loved one on that day. So you can't really speak with any true emotions with that regard.

I just feel you're letting your anti-American government bias cloud your judgement again.
 
With all due respect, you didn't lose a loved one on that day. So you can't really speak with any true emotions with that regard.

I just feel you're letting your anti-American government bias cloud your judgement again.

You're right mate,

I didn't lose a loved one that day, but many who did have said exactly what I just said.

And surely everyone deserves a fair trial don't they? no matter how big a cunt we might think they are ( and I think he was a cunt for the record).

If we are to believe Obamas story then that was murder, to put him to "Swim with the fishes" sounds more like a mafia style disposal of a murder victim they wanted to silence to me. (for the record I don't buy this story of events for a minute by the way).

I could talk to you all day about Osama and why he deserved a trial, and what evidence they had to link him with the attacks in the first place but that's neither here nor there when we think about the basic human right that everyone surely deserves a fair trial.

I hope I'm making sense and my point clearly, been on the pop all day in my defence if not :)
 
Last edited:
If the Conspiracy Theorists concentrated purely on Bin Laden, it would be easier to take their assertions more seriously. If I`d never been inundated with the more imaginative fringe theories clouding the issue....and looked at his life, Al Quaeda, and his death in isolation...I`d be more inclined to believe there was much more to it all than meets the eye....and so would many others, I`d warrant.
 
If the Conspiracy Theorists concentrated purely on Bin Laden, it would be easier to take their assertions more seriously. If I`d never been inundated with the more imaginative fringe theories clouding the issue....and looked at his life, Al Quaeda, and his death in isolation...I`d be more inclined to believe there was much more to it all than meets the eye....and so would many others, I`d warrant.

Personally I take each piece of evidence/issue at it's own merits and don't get irritated by the things I feel are nonsense, I feel no need to compare and connect the two..

I can see how some may get annoyed when others talk about something they perceive to be nonsense, but I'm not such a person as I remind myself that different people are bound to think different things, this is the beauty (or flaw) of uniqueness/individuality for me.

But I see no point in letting those who think differently than me bug me.

However, when people deliberately mislead..... that's a different matter.
 
Last edited:
It`s not a case of irritation, Deany..you have misunderstood me.

It`s a case of the person presenting what may be a valid theory losing credibility, and diluting what may be a valid point with so much bumpf, there is no incentive whatsoever to begin unravelling it all.

That is the Conspiracy Theorist`s real job..so he can present what he has found in a concise, accurate, and meaningful way.

These remarks are general, btw..not aimed at you specifically.

I remember once debating with someone over 9/11...he wanted a full and frank discussion. A day later, he had posted me 47 youtube videos, and a single comment....`That must surely be all the proof you need`.

Yeah, right.
 
It`s not a case of irritation, Deany..you have misunderstood me.

It`s a case of the person presenting what may be a valid theory losing credibility, and diluting what may be a valid point with so much bumpf, there is no incentive whatsoever to begin unravelling it all.

That is the Conspiracy Theorist`s real job..so he can present what he has found in a concise, accurate, and meaningful way.

These remarks are general, btw..not aimed at you specifically.

I remember once debating with someone over 9/11...he wanted a full and frank discussion. A day later, he had posted me 47 youtube videos, and a single comment....`That must surely be all the proof you need`.

Yeah, right.

The trouble with video evidence these days is we can't know for sure what's real and what isn't, such have been the advances in technology.

By all means we can watch them, use them as a supporting piece of evidence,, but to present them as the main piece of evidence? no.

So in that sense we agree.
 
The trouble with video evidence these days is we can't know for sure what's real and what isn't, such have been the advances in technology.

By all means we can watch them, use them as a supporting piece of evidence,, but to present them as the main piece of evidence? no.

So in that sense we agree.

The problem is this..a conspiracy theorist sends me a youtube video. He feels it shows proof of something or other...and in all liklihood, he hasn`t even watched it all. He feels it is accurate because it supports what he already believes, and has no critical eye for it. Or maybe because it`s from a source he trusts, or proved accurate in the past.

He then..after maybe spending three minutes on it..posts it to me.

I research the maker..his career, beliefs..what he has got right or wrong in the past. Look at his claim..then log on to sites that back him up. Root through all the nonsense, find the central claim.

Then I go onto the skeptical sites...search for mentions of this claim, and how they are being refuted.

Next, I delve into the history, or science of the claim...and look in partcular for anything that is hard to explain or refute. And then, only then, will I maybe enter a couple of discussions on relevant forums....from both sides of the debate.

In the end..I will have maybe spent 3 hours researching 30 seconds worth of `info`.


And then..the Conspirace Theorist will try to tell me I`m not interested in the truth..and post me another dang video! :)

So why should I do HIS work? Everything is in it for him..so to speak...if he`s right, I say so, and he feels vindicated, feels a sense of victory.
Yes..I might sometimes find something of real value to take away for myself...but rarely.


You`re very welcome to post whatever you want on this thread about what you feel is the truth..and to call me a sheeple/ignorant/deluded, whatever. If that is what you want, or feel.
But in the end..to change conciousness, awareness, to get out a message..you need to engage..and engage on others terms, not your own...or you`re just tallking to yourself, and the already converted.
To sum up....I have a vague interest in Bin Laden, because it is obvious we don`t know the whole story..and there are a lot of good reasons why we might be misled.

But I just ain`t interested enough to spend hours researching , trying to find a` Unified Conspiracy Field Theory of Everything` for you..or anyone else.

Not again....:)
 
The problem is this..a conspiracy theorist sends me a youtube video. He feels it shows proof of something or other...and in all liklihood, he hasn`t even watched it all. He feels it is accurate because it supports what he already believes, and has no critical eye for it. Or maybe because it`s from a source he trusts, or proved accurate in the past.

He then..after maybe spending three minutes on it..posts it to me.

I research the maker..his career, beliefs..what he has got right or wrong in the past. Look at his claim..then log on to sites that back him up. Root through all the nonsense, find the central claim.

Then I go onto the skeptical sites...search for mentions of this claim, and how they are being refuted.

Next, I delve into the history, or science of the claim...and look in partcular for anything that is hard to explain or refute. And then, only then, will I maybe enter a couple of discussions on relevant forums....from both sides of the debate.

In the end..I will have maybe spent 3 hours researching 30 seconds worth of `info`.


And then..the Conspirace Theorist will try to tell me I`m not interested in the truth..and post me another dang video! :)

So why should I do HIS work? Everything is in it for him..so to speak...if he`s right, I say so, and he feels vindicated, feels a sense of victory.
Yes..I might sometimes find something of real value to take away for myself...but rarely.


You`re very welcome to post whatever you want on this thread about what you feel is the truth..and to call me a sheeple/ignorant/deluded, whatever. If that is what you want, or feel.
But in the end..to change conciousness, awareness, to get out a message..you need to engage..and engage on others terms, not your own...or you`re just tallking to yourself, and the already converted.
To sum up....I have a vague interest in Bin Laden, because it is obvious we don`t know the whole story..and there are a lot of good reasons why we might be misled.

But I just ain`t interested enough to spend hours researching , trying to find a` Unified Conspiracy Field Theory of Everything` for you..or anyone else.

Not again....:)

He he,

so which video did I send that irked you so much? ;-)

I know where you're coming from, I get it, and I know you're only digging for the truth, where we may differ is when we are willing to consider something as being a possible truth, I get the feeling you prefer not to take this method and dismiss any possibility of a thing being a truth until you see proof of the absolute certainty of it being a truth.

I don't think I have ever called anyone a "sheeple"

I may have called one or two ignorant in my time though and possibly deluded, I've also no doubt that I too have been guilty of ignorant acts and suffering from delusions in the past.

Sadly, I'm not perfect, yet!

I've no interest in persuading people to think what I think on this forum, my purpose for coming here has always remained the same, to try and gauge how the people of Preston think about global events, oh and I like to read up on PNE sometimes too :) I never even intended to debate with anyone at all here you know, I kind of got pulled into that one by a few posters and it stuck, so here we are debating.
 
Most of my comments were not aimed specifically at yourself..I was just explaining my experiences in general.

I am a little pissed off with a big trend on CT sites right now..(and yes, propagated by you as well)..claiming that Bill Gates et al want to reduce the Earth`s population by killing 10% off through dodgy vaccinations.

They have misunderstood the reality so badly, it`s embarassing.

There are ways to change the world for the better....for the poor in the third world, and for future generations..and it is sad to see people, professing to care, going hell for leather on attacking the solutions.
 
Top