Proof, the press and why famous people's death is never what it seems to be

So Bin-Laden is dead. Or is he? As always when famous people die who didn't report a life threatening disease before passing away the official version of course can't be right. We need to see pictures to believe he's dead. Of course once the pictures are issued as they probably will at some point because it's of importance to the public (never mind lusting after those pics makes you delight in death and destruction) some internet guy or former CIA worker will say that the picture was either photoshopped or taken years ago. Being a US led operation this leads automatically to the questioning of the president's motivation for the mission. Actually no real questioning goes on because being American means that you do things either for money, to win elections or both. So Obama didn't catch the terrorist (if he really did) to eliminate an exceptionally dangerous and able terrorist leader but because he wanted to ensure that he could stay in the White House. The body was not really buried at sea within 24 hours to follow Muslim burial traditions but so that nobody could find evidence that the CIA is lying about the events. But here's the question: why bother with evidence? Predictably like a Swiss watch the public's imagination reaches conclusions respecting these golden rules:
-if a famous person's death was reported as a natural death that means it's a covered up murder
-when it is reported to have been an assassination it either never happened until proven otherwise, happened long ago instead of now, was a natural death or happened for scandalous reasons not yet revealed
-all that is needed for proof is a photo (as long as none exists)
-once a photo is issued it's fake or taken long ago or taken out of context
-when an act of decency is reported (like respecting burial traditions) it's either a cover-up or PR but what it is under no circumstances is an act of decency
-if something horrible happens to a Western country it's actually their own fault (especially if the countries concerned are the USA or Israel)

While it's only human to explain events in the light of one's own beliefs what is really staggering is that despite the fact that these thoughts are so mainstream that everybody seems to have them, they at the same time seem to provide the illusion that only a selected and particularly critically thinking, smart lot sees the world in this way. This doesn't mean that the media and everybody else is telling the truth all the time. Probably not. But mistaking criticizing everything with critical thinking is not really as smart as it makes you feel. Regurgitating the conspiracy theories constructed with the help of the above mentioned bullet points isn't as original as you might think. It's rather a mush of watching too much CSI, having unexamined racist attitudes towards the West and a weird delight in following the same lines of thinking over and over again while pretending that your conclusions are exciting and original and the official version was written by criminals.