Texsox

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 5, 2011 -> 09:03 AM) He's dead unless someone releases a photo of him with today's newspaper, and anyone who, 6 months from now is still saying he's alive will look pathetic. You don't need to cater to them. You mean if they photoshop a pic of him in 6 months holding a newspaper you will believe it? The fake photo thing will go both ways. Some will say the US photos are a hoax and the "alive" photos are real. Others will claim the dead photos are real and the live are faked. QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ May 5, 2011 -> 03:42 PM) I mean, we performed an unauthorized military operation in a 3rd party's country. Of course it's illegal by some definition. The real question is why would anyone care. We've had reliable reports of Mexican military aircraft straying into US airspace. If they started shooting at alleged criminals on US soil, we'd care. If Candian troops raided a business on US soil and extradited someone they believed was doing something illegal, we'd care. So I'd guess Pakistan believes they are a real country with flags, holidays, police and laws and all that s***.

This is a team that many around baseball picked to win their division at the minimum. No one seriously would have picked them for last place. The difference between what they were expected to play by the majority of baseball experts and what they are currently playing at, makes them about the best team to play this poorly. But of course some people here are much smarter than those that are paid to prognosticate.

QUOTE (lostfan @ May 4, 2011 -> 09:56 PM) Thanks for slamming that one home for me. I figure it was an easy alley-oop. We do operate above any law. I wonder why so many around the world resent us.

Hmm, what are the Rangers doing? Now that the Sox season is shaping up to be a really bitter pill to swallow, I will probably sneak a few more peaks at Ranger's games than I would have. Not switching allegiances, but I just can't watch a passionless piece of crap team. What are you going to do with a little extra free time?

QUOTE (lostfan @ May 4, 2011 -> 04:54 PM) They could've dragged Osama out onto Freedom Plaza, and gave President Obama a handgun so he can personally execute him in public live on TV and probably a good 80% of the electorate wouldn't have a huge problem with it. That's what's kind of tripping me out about people asking whether it was illegal. Even if it wasn't totally above board, what are you going to actually PROSECUTE someone? Who's going to do it? UN?

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 4, 2011 -> 04:44 PM) I'm giving it about a week before we get an op-ed that complains that we went about this the wrong way, that he he should have been kept alive, that we had no right under international law to kill him, etc etc. You know it's coming. And there is a valid question in there. But it is all speculation because what exactly happened in the compound, and the options they may have had, will never be conclusively known. We can guess what the twenty or so people who were arrested may say, but "our side" will never testify.

And seriously, why the hell is that boy allowed to play? That's just wrong.

I know we have some lawyers here, but as I read the report the judges have said if you are a cheerleader you must cheer. Same as if you are on the basketball team you have to dribble and shoot when asked. She does have the right to remain silent, all she had to do was not try out for cheerleading and she would be silent. Instead she tried out and was accepted as a cheerleader. If a cheerleader does not lead cheers, she isn't fulfilling what she agreed to do. I get that point. The principal is the problem here. A common sense solution is to allow her to do what she did, as long as it doesn't create a spectacle. BTW, at least in my campus, cheerleaders do not rotate for different sports. They are cheerleaders for the entire year. If the guy didn't play football, or was never announced, it never would have been a problem. Again, the principal has his head way up his ass on this one.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 4, 2011 -> 03:04 PM) conspiracy alert!! What if Bin Laden isn't dead? What if they captured him instead to gain more intel? Eh? Eh? Edit: I write this because of the flip in "we'll show you the pics, we won't show you the pics" from the WH Waterboard him, just for the fun of it. They could easily photoshop something if they were trying to pretend he's dead. As the days go by and it becomes clear he wasn't armed, I wonder why a bigger effort wasn't made to bring him in alive. My best answer is the government executed him to avoid giving him a huge stage.

If it is going to hurt, make it really f***ing hurt.

I just can't agree with the ruling. I disagree with continuing to label him a rapist when he was not convicted. But he did assault her, and she should not be punished.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 4, 2011 -> 12:04 PM) Ah yes the good old days... I wonder whatever happened to Heather? I was channeling her . . .

2011. At this point in time I expected the record to be almost the exact reverse of what it is.

Good move in not releasing the pictures. The doubters will claim the pictures are photo-shopped. The extremists will use it as a rallying point.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/05/03/arkansas....dex.html?hpt=T2

I wonder what enhanced technique she used to get the tip? http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2011/05/o...ur-in-2008.html

QUOTE (kapkomet @ May 3, 2011 -> 10:02 PM) No, you can't. And that's why they always throw that line out there. "You can never be certain". Of course not, let's continue every straw man arguement there is to make it look like the political discourse has changed somehow. Guess what, it hasn't. I do not believe this is a political discussion unless you believe that all Reps believe in torture and all Dems are against it. I believe it is more a moral *and* practical one. What will you say or admit to if "enhanced" techniques are being used? Someone then has to check out those leads. If you are telling me you won't lie under duress and say whatever to make the "enhanced" techniques stop, then you are a better man than I. If the bombing in Tora Bora was successful, would they have credit the enhanced techniques for that? Or was that a red herring tossed out by someone wishing to make the "enhanced" techniques stop?

I'm stilling planning my vacation around the Sox schedule, but damn, it just ain't going to be the same. The difference between expectations and results is about the greatest for any season I can remember. I just haven't seen enough the past two weeks to believe it can turn around, even in a division like the Central.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 3, 2011 -> 09:13 PM) Panetta confirmed advanced interrogation techniques, including waterboarding, produced the intel they needed to find Bin Laden. If it didn't play a part I don't see why he wouldn't have just said so. The question will be how much of a part and would the intel have happened without those techniques, or even would it have been better intel which might have saved time. And the worse part is it is impossible to predict, Did enhanced techniques cause them to chase other locations and leads which were false? That's what I really dislike about the discussion, you cannot say with certainty.

I'm feeling the walk off the field the game is over

Anyone think it isn't Dunn?

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 3, 2011 -> 06:48 PM) This would make sense if not for the fact that they (Pak military) routinely checked the area for operatives, literally going door to door checking ID's. They should have known that this compound held a target of some level of importance. That's the extent of the US decision to check this place out - it looked way too big and secure for it to be a nobody. Right, and I would think he was hiding and they had the kind of IDs that being a billionaire could secure. They could have assumed it was a drug kingpin, a mistress for the President, a Russian mobster, or almost anything else. Who really would have assumed it was bin Laden? Like I said, I am leaving the possibility there that they could have been fooled. After all is everyone who lives in a secure gated community in the US doing something illegal? But it is more likely someone high up in Pakistan was protecting him.

QUOTE (Brian @ May 3, 2011 -> 05:15 PM) This. I don't care if we killed an unarmed man. He didn't deserve a trial. He admitted to everything. I just hope the SEAL that shot him in the head had some sweet one liner before pulling the trigger. You just rejected the entire US legal system and the US Constitution. But, if there ever was a case where we should throw it out, this would be the one.

After reading and watching several reports, I am open to the Pakistanis not knowing he was there. In some ways, it was safer than out in the wilderness. The US had to factor in a military base that close by in the operation. No one really would have suspected he was hiding that close. Now it would be even more believable if it was in a different country than Pakistan. At first I was surprised he wasn't surrounded by more fire power and in a compound with tunnels or some other mean of escaping. But again, that would have attracted more attention. Another thought, if high ranking Pakistan military and government knew, why not build him a compound inside one of their bases? A top secret building could have been arranged as a research facility. I will agree the most likely scenario is some knew and were protecting him, but I am open to the idea that they did not.