Quote:
Originally Posted by right-track
I'm beginning to think you work for the U.S. government Freebase? 
Call me naive, but I just don't buy everything we're told by governments in general. That goes for all of them.
I can believe he's dead. I can believe he was killed when they say he was.
I just find it hard to believe they buried him at sea in order to observe the traditions of another religion in order to placate ordinary muslims.
I'm more likely to believe they still have the body. |
I used to work for the U.S. govt. But now that I'm not, I can call them on their B.S.
They most definitely did NOT bury him at sea "to observe muslim tradition". (According to muslim scholars, sea burial is only appropriate if the muslim died at sea) The only thing they supposedly did that observed it was the washing of the body and laying it to rest in the 24-hour time-frame, as muslim tradition requires. Apparently, and as many people are suggesting, they didn't want to bury him in the dirt in fears that his grave would be a rally point and shrine for his followers. If you ask me, they could have put him in an unmarked grave and still followed muslim tradition, while avoiding what they may have been trying to avoid.
I wonder if the aircraft carrier that he was brought to was closer than any other U.S. domain on the ground that would facilitate their needs? If that's the case, they might have tossed him in the water as a matter of ease. But at the same time, it seems just as likely that they'd have kept the body for whatever reasons and simply reported that they buried him at sea in the 24-hour window to appease the muslim community. After all, no one would be the wiser.