Did she go through to proper channels by further submitting proof; seems like a one-sided investigation by you based on a comment in an interview?
I asked you a question. You can answer or take a mulligan. I get you think OBL fake/ 911 fake/Russian UK attack fake. Just for sake of curiosity- Did the kids get killed in the school in Pakistan or was that fake too?
You are correct, she may have got the wrong information. Absolutely!
But equally was there a non unilateral open investigation into the raid? Was the body produced as evidence? No!! So basically they are asking us to take their word for it...and am I obliged to take their word for it?? Is it reasonable for me to not take their word for it?-
You have not answered many of the questions I had originally raised, but instead asked more and more questions somewhat tangential to the original discussion.
May I ask why? Is this a method of avoidance?
Will you answer the original questions??
Now coming to the tangential question of "
Did the kids get killed in the school in Pakistan or was that fake too?"
You have said that I consider the OBL SEAL raid in 2011 to be fake. I wish to clarify - I accept that there was a SEAL raid in Abbottabad in 2011, what I do not accept is that this raid involved killing OBL (that is not to say he was killed or not or indeed other people were killed or not). I have given my reason for not accepting this
specific point above. (Do note I am open to changing this viewpoint, if something more than the word of the US government or the Pakistani government is put forth but since the best evidence was dumped into the sea it looks difficult...and indeed suspicious...).
Having made this clarification, I accept that there was an attack on a school in Peshawar. And I accept children were killed as their bodies
were not dumped in the sea. Do you see the difference? If the bodies of the children were not produced, one would reasonably be suspicious of the murder of the children and it would be reasonable to reject that children were killed in this attack...??
Coming back to the original point: Salisbury incidence. Please do not confuse the issue. I do accept there was an attack on a British and a Russian citizen with chemical weapons in Salisbury. What my issue is that the accusation it was a Russian state sanctioned attack is just that, an accusation and not proof.