Bin Laden is dead - Page 4

I doubt he is but that would be the only reason to keep him alive. Get information from him and then make him walk the plank.

Well, I asked because that statement seemed to imply that they might lie about killing him while secretly keeping him alive to interrogate him. I was wondering if that's what you meant or not.

Yea that's what I meant and I hope we are doing that. But if we did have him why bother making an announcement at all? I'm sure already some douchebag lawyer is guessing that OBL is alive and requesting to represent him and have the red cross visit.

OK. So that makes this part of your post interesting:


Your last sentence implied the possibility that the government could be lying to us about the disposition of Osama bin Laden. But you don't seem to consider the possibility of them lying in general about him, accepting their claim that he was the mastermind of 9/11...and declare having no problem with his execution without a trial.

Well after seeing all the videos and statements from his counterparts I'm willing to believe that he and his pals did it.

Uhhh...okaaay. \

Seeing the throng of ghouls, baying and ululating outside the White House, over the premeditated execution, with no trial, of another person, no matter who he is, makes me feel, ashamed, sick and disgusted as to how far down the road to medievalism this country has been dragged by its leaders, fed by the mainstream media's lies and biases. The current conduct of the US military, and the Obama White House, is exactly the kind of methodology against which countless thousands of US soldiers have died to resist in the past, the type of conduct that reared its very ugly head in Western Europe in the first half of the last century.

Osama bin Laden was accused of lots of heinous acts, but to deny *him* a trial sets the most dangerous precedent of them all: ANYONE, could be accused of ANYTHING, if the authorities decide so, and make that decision. Using trumped-up charges, bogus "justifications", denial of due process, denial of legal representation, imprisonment without charge, kept in legal limbo, solitary confinement, tortured, and even murdered in custody. All that has to be done, if a particular person or group is considered a thorn in the side of the powers-that-be, is abuse the law enforcement agencies into doing their dirty work, and that someone's life is down the tubes, whether innocent or guilty. The reality of their innocence or guilt never to be reasonably established. These are the long established, tried and tested methods of the most evil, vicious dictators and thugs that have disgraced the human race. Due process is what has traditionally separated us, the so-called shining city on the hill, from *them*.

Until very recently.

Open, fair trials, by a jury of peers, are for civilized nations. Summary executions, and secret, military tribunal, kangaroo trials are for those who rule by force, fear and terminal corruption.

The United States of America, by the actions of its leaders, is now siding with the kind of world that Osama bin Laden was accused of trying to bring about.

And just to remind everyone who still thinks that Osama bin Laden had anything to do with 9/11:

Here's Dick Cheney, explicitly debunking it.

I don't suddenly acknowledge that Cheney suddenly turned honest. But when he, of all people on this planet, tells us things like that, you gotta know that the story being spoon-fed to us by the corporate weasels and the corrupt, criminal lying ObamaCorp, is a heap of GARBAGE.

Truly evil bastard,s the lot of them.

Strikes me that the US went well beyond what was called for in regards to preserving the dignity of bin Laden. I guess we don't want to stir more shit up, hence the respect, if only to protect the troops. Personally I would have liked to see his carcus rot in the streets in a cage.

If they release the videos or photos of Bin Laden being dead would you than believe it? I guess you are a sceptic ? Some people are unreal

See my two posts above. First, you are believing the media without a shred of proof. Second, we have become what 'the terrorists', whoever they are, want.

I'm still trying to digest and assimilate all the information, reactions, analysis, etc. in the aftermath of the announced killing of Osama bin Laden.

One of the handful of men we have been allegedly pursuing for 10 years - at a cost of trillions of dollars, thousands (likely hundreds of thousands) of human lives, and many of our freedoms - is now dead.

Does this change anything?

Will our troops be coming home?

Will the unconstitutional Patriot Act be repealed?

Will the Guantanamo Bay prison be closed?

Will invasive and unhealthy TSA body scans and pat downs at airports stop?

And about these celebrations in the streets at the White House & Ground Zero. I remember how I felt when I saw pictures and video of people celebrating in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks. Back then I felt anger, rage, even hatred towards those people. How dare they rejoice when so many innocent people had died and so many more were suffering? Even back then, I knew those feelings were not good - not Christlike - and I was wrong to feel that way. But I still felt that way, and it took time for me to work through those feelings. I no longer feel that way.

There are people right now - most of whom are average people like you and me just trying to make their way in life - who have lost homes, livelihoods, and loved ones in the wars we are still waging in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya. These people are seeing the images of Americans celebrating and carrying on. They are seeing the gloating, the taunting, the hateful rhetoric and feeling the same way towards us that I did nearly 10 years ago towards those celebrating 9/11. Will they work through their feelings as I did? Or will they act on them?

It's time to stop this vicious cycle of hatred that is slowly destroying us from within like a disease. The only way to defeat hate is with love. Unconditional love. As the Master said:


The change we so desperately need in our nation and world cannot come about by the death of one man. It can only come about by the death of the natural man within each of us.

I did already.

I would have much prefered a trial, but not at the expense of another US soldier, and that is what appears to have triggered Osamas death, literally.

Cheney mistakenly said Osama when he meant Saddam Hussein. He was asked if he wrongly spoke at the next question, where he verified he had. The context didn't fit either.

Well, its highly likely though isn't it? Why kill an unarmed man, who offered no resistance, who is the most wanted person on the planet, and has the details in his head of the entire network of Al Queda terrorists, we wish to eliminate, for world-peace.? Then dump his body at sea, so there is no evidence of capture or death...

You seem to wish to believe what people in authority tell you without a shred of evidence to prove it. Is there any evidence that Osama is dead, other than a press propaganda machine in overdrive?

Then in the next breath tell us that Obama and his administration is the spawn of Satan...and the press are all liberals pandering to the prezz...

Perhaps youre a bit unstable?

Actually just the opposite for me. Read the follow-up posts to get the full context.



I did?



No. I'm fine. You either: 1) haven't fully read my posts, 2) are mis-interpreting them, or 3) have me confused with another poster.

Well I do feel that it served an important psychological need with both the american people and Osama's followers. We got some closure from it as far the responsible party was delt with and his followers can see there definite consequences to attacking America. A much better lesson than hanging Saddam which seemed like an empty victory and had nothing to do with 911 ( although our previous administration seemed to equate the two ).

I can't see this having a better ending if he'd just never been found.

You're confusing the laws of a civil society with the rules of war and courts martial. OBL declared war on US. He's not a criminal but a combatant. He's not covered Geneva Convention because he does not comply or recognize it. It's not unjust that he met his end on the wrong side of a navy seal.


I'm curious. Who are the peers of OBL that would sit in judgement of him?

OBL outlived his usefulness as the Emmanuel Goldstein of The State.

They'll soon find another.

First of all, private citizens cannot declare war. Only countries can declare war. Secondly, I wasn't aware that the Geneva Conventions excluded non-participants. Can you point out the relevant clauses? Thanks. I'm not being facetious here. I'd really like to know what it says.

Where's that rule written down? OBL was more than a private citizen. He was the leader of a terrorist organization.


How would a "non-participants" participate then?

Since you're ignorant here's a wiki

CLINTON ON TERROR: 'IT DOES NOT END WITH ONE DEATH'

Secretary of state says "we have to renew our resolve and redouble our efforts" across the world.

These people are so fucking predictable.

Expert: Security Checkpoints Near Soft Targets May Soon Become The Norm

A Day May Come When You'll Be Patted Down Going Into Stores:


Well it has worked I guess:



Of course none of this has happened in the US to date. One wonders why that is so.

GOD and believe me OBL would go to hell what he did to human beings.The sharks had a good time with him and a good meal to boot.

Putting aside for a moment that fact that you're obviously a conspiracy nut (as demonstrated here many times), I still think your post is bonkers.

A trial? A freaking trial? Here we have the most wanted terrorist in the world. The man is responsible for over 3,000 American deaths. He did not deserve the same Constitutional rights Americans have. Nor did he deserve protections under Geneva or any other agreement. He operated beyond the law, beyond the scope of any human decency imaginable. Most people understand that morally speaking, the only think to do is kill people like that. He didn't rob a bank or stab his wife in an argument. He didn't commit a financial crime. He didn't commit computer fraud, or kill someone while drunk driving. He's an international terrorist, disavowed by most, if not all nations. He deserves nothing.

And what would a trial accomplish? Nothing. It would be a spectacle. A "fair" trial would be impossible, so he'd likely be sentenced to death anyway. And what happens then? We kill him. In the meantime, he becomes a living, breathing reason for radical Muslims to incite violence. But wait, let me guess: It would "demonstrate American values to the world." To that, I say "bullsh**." Let me tell you what it would do: It would help guilty, white, liberal progressives like yourself feel better about themselves. This, of course, is what got Obama elected in the first place. It why people like you love The Foreign Apology Tour that Obama went on after being elected. It's all about PROVING that we're not racist, we're not bigoted, we're not violent, we don't throw our weight around. But it's crap. We are a superpower, and we should act like one. We should embrace our role as a leader in the world. We're not "one of many voices." We're the loudest and biggest voice, because we've got the biggest economy and military in the world.

I, for one, will not feel guilty about America's standing in the world. I will not feel guilty because we have a larger economy and better standard of living than many, many other nations. And I will certainly not feel guilty about being happy about that bastard being dead. Frankly, it's outrageously offensive for you to condemn anyone for that, especially those who lost loved ones in those attacks.

Of course you have the right to feel however you want about anything. I don't condemn anyone for celebrating OBL's death. I do feel that it's inappropriate and wrong to celebrate it in the streets and have this smug sense of superiority or pride about it. I personally feel no glee or joy in any unarmed man being killed in front of his family, regardless of what a vile human being he may have been.

What of those who have lost loved ones in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya in our wars? Do you feel the same for them as you do for the victims of 9/11?

How do you ascertain a "smug sense of superiority or pride?" You're inferring that. I think they have every right to dance in the streets. We've been hunting this guy for ten years. Justice was done by killing him.

As for the story of his death, it's not clear how it happened. We'll probably never know. And I don't give a damn about his family. He's terrorist and he deserved it.


Absolutely not. First, they are not Americans. I put American lives first. Sorry, that's how it is. Secondly, those deaths were either accidental/collateral/unintentional, or in combat against US forces. I don't celebrate them and I do think they are regrettable at the very least, but do I feel the same as I do about those who lost family members and friends in the worst terrorist attack in history? You have to be kidding.

So, to adapt a saying from Orwell's book Animal Farm:

All life is precious. But some lives are more precious than others.

Is that your sentiment?

I'm marveling at all of the question begging by the revelers.

Obama got his photo-op at Ground Zero today.

Consider this Obama's "Mission Accomplished" Moment.

We're still in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya.

and Pakistan.

Indeed.

And Pakistan is probably scared we're going to pull out and stop sending "foreign aid" now.

We've given them over $18 billion since 9/11.

I wouldn't say that. I would say that American lives are more valuable than terrorist scumbags like bin Laden.

Wow.. the ad hominems are now in the very first sentence! SDW must have honed his argumentative skills.


According to whom?

You know that although he was on the FBI's most wanted list for various attacks in Africa, the FBI did NOT want him for 9/11... they admitted it themselves: "we have no hard evidence linking UBL with the crimes of 9/11". You know that the US Justice Dept. also did not indict him for 9/11, for that very same reason. You know that the CIA also claimed that "we have found no link between bin Laden's money, and the funding for 9/11. You know that President Bush said in 2002: "I am not concerned about bin Laden, as he did several times after that. You know that Osama bin Laden had Marfan Syndrome (a degenerative condition in which sufferers have greatly shortened lifespans, as well as major renal dysfunctions. You Know, that many authorities had reckoned that OBL was probably already dead, even as long ago as 2001.

This was a media induced perception, which started before the first tower came down.

Here we have an Obama administration that is steeped in a stew of lies, deceptions, fear-mongering and manipulation, and suddenly they tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth about Osama bin Laden? There is a very large leap of faith, and I would prefer to see evidence. But evidence in this case, is patently either too inconvenient to present, or points away from what we have been asked to believe... on blind FAITH alone.

The Obama administration has wanted a quick, clean end to US involvement in Afghanistan. The far greater majority of the US public (70%) also want an end to it, ASAP. How better to do it than to remove the great boogeyman from the international scene... whether the removal was for real or a staged/fabricated event? Either way, it's a big factor in kicking off his 2012 re-election campaign... he did what Bush failed to do.


That probably goes without saying. He was not an American for starters. He was a Saudi citizen.


Thats nothing new. Our entire banking system, for one example, operates *way* beyond the law, with absolute impunity, and *wildly* beyond the scope of any human decency imaginable.


Like what? Like what he has been painted by the Church of the Corporate Media? Or by actual evidence linking him to his alleged offenses? In the complete and utter lack of the latter, the former takes preference... hey ho... lets create a monster, then have a public lynching.

So SDW advocates that killing people without trial is moral. Hopefully, he would apply his same fevered logic as regards about someone who, through the power of his political office, has killed 10s of thousands of innocent people, in plain sight? There are plenty of those around, and never even been arrested, let alone charged.


"Nothing" also excludes being murdered in cold blood.

Here is what he *MIGHT* have been involved with:

Bin Laden was indicted for a part in funding the bombing of two US Embassies on the African continent in the 1990s. He was also accused of playing a part in the bombing of the USS Cole, arguably an act of war (as opposed to terrorism), since the target was a military, rather than civilian, asset. He did not plant the bombs. He was on the FBI's "most wanted terrorist" list, on account of these alleged activities. But he was never brought to trial for any of these acts either; the 4 men who were found guilty of carrying out the bombings were only *believed* to have been connected to Osama bin Laden, and it was only *believed*, rather than proved, that the funding for those bombings was provided by bin Laden. Again, no proof, merely speculation and conjecture.

So, OBL's alleged, as opposed to proven activities... a huge, massive difference.... killed 258 people at the two embassies and a further 17 on the USS Cole. The most vilified and demonized man in all of modern history *might* have been partially responsible for the deaths of 275 people.

To compare: Lets look at another *known* terrorist funder, the current Chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, Peter King, who has admitted/confessed (not in court unfortunately), that not only did he fund a terrorist group (Provisional IRA), responsible for killing thousands in Europe and the UK, but also said that he "is proud of his actions".

What's the difference between Peter King and Bin Laden? The former is white, the latter was dark. The former is "Christian", the latter was "Muslim". The former is American, the letter was Saudi. The former's admitted terror funding led to the deaths of 1000+ in many small scale attacks over two or more decades, whereas the latter's alleged terror funding led to 275 deaths in three high profile attacks over a shorter period. The former enjoys a media black-out on his admitted blood-stained past, the latter became the superstar of terror for something that the US powers-that-be quietly admitted he was not responsible for, but were content to sit back and watch the media to tell the public otherwise, without a SOLITARY SHRED of hard evidence.

So, one man who might have had a tenuous involvement in 3 serious crimes, is now considered so "dangerous" that it is impossible to try him for these acts? Dangerous to whom?There's a good question. Come *ON*, SDW, even you are more rational than that. Well, I would hope.... but that's being a tad optimistic.

To illustrate how SDW has taken leave of what senses he might have once had: In contrast to media-created "monster", Osama bin Laden, lets compare how the western world dealt with some of the most horrific examples of humanity in recorded history, those who orchestrated the killings of 6 million Jews and anywhere between 5.5 million and 15 million others during WWII, including blacks, gays, Romani, handicapped, Poles, Slavs, catholics, ie anyone who didn't conform to the racial and ethnic makeup deemed correct by the government of that country?

We gave them a series of trial. Fair trials. real, public, and open trials. Not a dictator-style kangaroo court/secret military tribunal. And they got the justice they deserved... and they got life and death sentences.

To elevate one lone angry man's status to above that those who tried to eliminate entire sections of the human race shows that we, courtesy of the media and some uncorroborated government pronouncements, have completely lost all sense of proportion. By placing one international criminal, OBL, in a category "worse than the Nazis" is in effect trivializing the Holocaust and all the other atrocities of World War II, to "lesser importance than a man who might have had a part t play in a handful of bombings". SDW, you have swallowed the media koolaid by the gallon; your hallucinatory hate-filled rantings echo this in every post you make.


Yes of course it would! Americans love spectacle, it's one of the biggest parts of our culture. We thrive on celebrity worship... and in this case, it would be the the quintessential show of the century: the public take down of the bogeyman du jour. Think of the media circus, the ratings, the advertising revenue. It would be the Superbowl combined with OJ Simpson, on steroids, and then multiplied by itself a hundred times over. Think of the money that would have been made! Capitalism at its best. Woohoo!


Impossible? That notion would only be the case in that this person had already been judged guilty by the media and 3 successive administrations, and this propaganda had been drilled into the collective US pysche for some 10 years, 24/7. In those circumstances, a fair trial would have had its problems.

However, a real trial demands and requires the production of evidence. A trial allows for cross examination of both the defendant/s and witnesses for both the defense and prosecution. In view of what the FBI, the CIA, the NSA and the DoJ, and various commentary and deductions by other intel agencies and politicians all over the world had already said... it appears that there is probably not enough evidence to try him. So whats the solution.. Kill him! That's the way out, and it avoids embarrassment...that is, if only they could get their ducks in a row and their stories straight, of course.. which as of yet, they haven't! This is almost a Laurel and Hardy sketch so far.. but without the humor. But overall, this follows the standard "problem, reaction, solution" scenario.


So, what are the new American values, according to SDW? If we suspect someone of committing a crime, we kill them, no proof required.. and no matter who they are?


.

Hmm. Sounds vaguely familiar. Of course, you know what always happens to empires, without exception?


Our status/standing in the world is the sum of what we do, who we are and what we stand for. The world tends to embrace the American people, but distrust its government... regardless of whether the "heads" of the "tails" of the corporately minted coin of government is doing the governing.

**

So, we all bayed for bin Laden's blood, like sociopaths and cowards, who have lost all sense of proportion. The people at GZ and the WHite House behaved just like those Palestinian kids who danced in the streets when they heard that the US had been attacked. If OBL had truly been the perpetrator of the crimes he had been tried for in the media, then an open trial with with full subpœna power and cross examination of witnesses would have revealed all... and maybe, the identity of whole bunch more "al Qaeda" people who *may* have been planning to attack us in the future. But no... they kill him, no questions asked, set the house on fire, and then dispose of the body. Obviously, the powers that be were as uncomfortable with Bin Laden on trial, as investigating the event of 9/11 itself.... which as we all know, according to the majority of the 9/11 Commissioners, including its two co-chairs, the "investigation" was a total, complete, and absolute fucking farce.

Hmm. Can you clarify something for me, then?

I asked how you felt about people who have lost their lives in the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya and you said:


So, the loss of innocent lives in the wars we are fighting is "regrettable", but not on the same level as the loss of life on 9/11?

Sammi,

Why do you think the US/Seal 6 left any survivors? Surely they wouldn't want people who could paint a different picture of events to their own if they're lying. Wasn't Osamas wife left alive? Didn't she witness Osamas death?

As we all know, Navy Seals don't screw up. But did they know the real identity of who was really in that house? Sure, theyu were told it was OBL... and they killed someone who they were informed was OBL... But yet again, there is no proof, no evidence, no body and a lot of hearsay. And... so far, we have no pictures. The Obama Administration has now said that the pictures will not be released "for national security" reasons! We were also told that " 'OBL' was hiding behind a woman using her as a human shield". This was quickly debunked as bogus. Also, we were told that he had a gun.. but that's also been debunked as a lie... the man who was killed (OBL?) was unarmed.

Oh wait.. we did get some pictures.... but they were fakes, and several prominent US politicians, including 3 senators, fell for it! Because they jerked their knees... so easy to do.

Osama had a bunch of wives... was the woman in there one of his wives? What is her name? Without Osama to verify that she was "his wife", there is no way to verify it.

We believe what we want to believe.. ie whatever maps onto our preconditioned comfort zones most readily. To hell with concepts like "chain of custody", or "proof", or "verification", or "standards of scientific scrutiny that will hold up in a court of law".

The Obama Administration , true to form, has lied to the US people on several counts regarding the facts surrounding this operation. Why believe the rest of what they say, on faith alone? Oh wait... don't forget, we are now a faith-based society. You're either with us, or against us.

....if it was him, that is. Lets see the ¢∞§¶ing proof. Or is it OK just to shoot some poor lookalike picked up off the streets of some Pakistani city, get the Seals to terminate "OBL"... then tell the US people "we got him"?

The 'live video feed from the Seals' helmets was cut off as they entered the compound. So wtf were Obama, Hillary and the rest of them watching? Oprah?

All bogus. More lies from the Obama team, and all the Obamabots respond as one. Even the White House has changed their initial lies. For yet more lies, or what? We will never know.

But one thing is for sure: First impressions and news are *king*. Thats what people remember, and the actuality and corrections are almost always forgotten. We believe what we want to believe, and in America's racist, endless war against Islam and the Arabic people... where all brown skinned Middle Easterners are legitimate targets... as we have been preconditioned to believe that they are all terrorists.

Now the boogeyman is branded a coward. Perfect. We can now kick back, swill our Bud Lites, clap each other on the back, and feel oh so very smug.

Islam is not a race you dolt.

1. I would bet it's nearly universally accepted here that you embrace every conspiracy imaginable, as well as some that aren't.

2. I said your argument is bonkers, not you.


Yes, sammi...it's all a lie. It's all...wait for it....a conspiracy! OBL wasn't involved in 9/11. It was a all media and WH fear mongering for political reasons. Sing it again, sammi! The rest of us will be living in reality if you need us.


Whether or not he is a citizen is irrelevant. The point is he should not enjoy the benefits a trial might afford him. It's simply not an appropriate way of dealing with people like this.


Let me get this straight: You're comparing the wholesale slaughter of 3,000 Americans to....financial crimes? \


Listen to yourself. You're comparing duly elected leaders to brutal terrorists. Really?


Let me stop there. Your position is that this should have been treated like, say, a domestic murder, carjacking, rape or other crime. What you fail to understand is that the protections and processes afforded by our justice system SHOULD NOT and DO NOT apply to international terrorists. Theirs are acts of war, but ones not committed by a nation. Would you demand the same process of Congress had formally declared war on AQ? Should we have put the soldiers from the German army on trial in WWII instead of trying to kill them on the battlefield and destroying their capacity to make war? That's what you really don't see...this isn't a law enforcement operation. This is a war.


Strawman.


Again, a strawman of sorts. You're taking statements and assigning meaning that wasn't intended. I never claimed we should be an "empire" or that we should not work with other nations. No, sammi...it's about understanding and accepting our role in the world that is the result of our economic and military power. We have no choice but to lead. Not dictate, not dominate, but lead. America should not be just "one voice" in the room, because that's not what we are. That brings me to this....


This is what both Obama and well, people that think like you fail to understand: We are less respected because we are not leading. We are following. This is Obama's stated philosophy. He thinks cooperation and surrendering our role in the world are the same things. But they are not. America is looked towards in international affairs because we are the planets sole superpower. When we don't fulfill that role, we become weaker. This doesn't mean we should have 700 military bases abroad, but it does mean we are the leading voice on many international matters. Libya is a prime example. While I supported stopping the pending slaughter that Khadafi was planning, we did not play a leading role. Instead, we followed the lead of the French and others. We got dragged along for the ride, and now we run the risk of an escalating war that we really don't want to be a part of. Obama has made no clear statement as to our position. It's "he must go" and then its "we're not targeting him." The world does not respect us because Obama went on his apology tour. It does not respect us. In fact, it respects us less. As I stated, the sole positive effect of this weak stance is to make guilty liberals feel better about themselves.


About time. In fact, I think it was a mistake to try and avoid inflaming Muslim sentiment by buying his body "in accordance with Muslim beliefs." That accomplished nothing. We should have released the photos of his dead body, cremated it, and then made clear that this is what we do when we catch people that murder our citizens in brutal acts of terrorism.


There you go again. A trial. I suppose I should not be surprised. As I said, you're a truther who literally believes NOTHING the government says. Don't get me wrong...I think there is always a good possibility we are not being told the truth. I think almost anything is possible in that regard. But somehow you take it to a whole other level.