"We should not celebrate the death of OBL because he too was human. We did not know him, we did not ever talk to him."

This is a paraphrase from a social networking status of a friend of my wife's... I talked about this to a few of my co-workers and surprisingly I got mixed opinions.

What is your opinion?

Is it wrong to celebrate the death of a human life? Even if; IMO, he deserved it?

NOTE:I realize there is a similiar thread about this but this is specifically about celebrating vs not celebrating the death of OBL or human life in general.

This is not a question that would've been asked in the 1940s.

Here are the lyrics of an Irving Berlin song played by the Glenn Miller Band sung by Al Bowlly.


When that man is dead and gone
When that man is dead and gone
We'll go dancing down the street
Kissing everyone we meet
When that man is dead and gone

What a day to wake up on
What a way to greet the dawn
Some fine day the news'll flash
Satan with a small moustache
Is asleep beneath the lawn
When that man is dead and gone

Satan, Satan, thought up a plan
Dressed as a man
Walking the earth and since he began
The world is hell for you and me
But what a heaven it will be

When that man is dead and gone
When that man is dead and gone
When they lay him twelve feet deep
I'll be there to laugh, not weep
When that man is dead and gone

What a day to wake up on
What a way to greet the dawn
Satan'll take him by the hand
To meet old Gerring, look what, man
When that man is dead and gone
When that man is dead and gone

Some fine day the news'll flash
Satan with a small moustache
Is asleep beneath the lawn
When that man is dead and gone

What a day to wake up on
What a way to greet the dawn
When a certain man is dead and gone

As a side note... Al Bowlly never got to see that day. He died in the London Blitz.

I sort of got into it with my sister-in-law on FB about this issue. Personally I do not celebrate an evil man going to meet his maker. I do celebrate that justice was done. My son ran into my bedroom when the news broke and we high fived and did a silly dance. Not because he was shot in the head, but because of the victory of getting him. Haven't we been trying to for the last 10 years? HELLO?

I am passionate about this. I think Americans over think this stuff. I'm not a real big politically correct gal. I say what I think right or wrong. I wasn't here when Hitler was defeated and killed himself and we won WW II. BUT they kissed and celebrated in the streets and it was RIGHT to do it. Why not celebrate when evil is defeated and one of our missions in the war accomplished? I don't know what all the hoopla is about. I rejoice. If that is insensitive... well, I've been called worse.

Classy good points .

Another point related . Hitler killed himself and he was cremated . Nobody saw the photos yet no one questions his demise .

His chared bones were scattered to locations undisclosed. The reason for this was so a shrine could not be built for him by the Hitler cult.

Tom,

Yeah we've come a long way baby... and I'm not sure it is the right way.

I have no problem in celebrating the death of such an evil man. If given the chance, I would have put that bullet in his head (and I wouldn't have given him the chance to surrender).

Does this mean the war is over, or that this is a voctory for America? No. This is a step toward a mission completeness and the worst, I think, is yet to come.

The opposing opinions were that human life should be valued regardless of the individual. That every human has a purpose, whether this was good or bad seemed irrelevant, but who are we to say what is good or bad?

Is might right?

According to the Bible, though shall not kill.
According to the Qu`ran, kill the infadels. So in his eyes, he was right. In our's he was wrong.

Again, is might right?

Is it wrong to celebrate the death of a human life? Even if; IMO, he deserved it?Hello Rick:

Yes, it is. You'd think people who purportedly are "pro life" would think so too... But, you'd be wrong..

I've seen the enemy burn the corps's of our boys and drag them through the streets... We're NOT like them. At least, I'M not like them. Plus, I'm a warrior. I can't believe any warrior celebrates the death of his enemy.

excon

PS> (edited) Oh, I'da killed him too, not because I hated him, but because it was my job. I would NOT have celebrated it.

I don't think we should celebrate. Don't get me wrong he deserved to die but terrorism is not going to end, and the "wars" aren't over. Like Classy said when Hitler Killed himself that pretty much ended WWII that was a reason to celebrate but this is yeah Im happy but it doesn't change anything really.

The Bible goes further than just 'Thou shalt not kill'.

I think it's wrong to celebrate his death. I understand the reaction but I do not think it is morally good.

As Ex pointed out, the pictures of Americans being killed was deplorable, so was the scenes across America this week. Such hypocrisy and celebration over the loss of life.

We are not the judges, friends.

To quote the Bunk (from the wire): Makes me sick, mother******, how far we done fell.

The bible actually if translated properly says.. Thou shall do no murder.

America is in a war with cowards who won't stand up and fight. They attack us when we least expect it and hide behind women, children if it can save their hides. I do NOT consider the killing of Osama MURDER. He led the attack on America, HE murdered. We killed him in a WAR on terror. Go USA.

Well, anyway lets please get the Bible translated properly anyway. Thou shall do no murder. Sometimes it is appropriate to kill. We are in a WAR.

Hello Rick:

Yes, it is. You'd think people who purportedly are "pro life" would think so too.... But, you'd be wrong..



The MURDER of innocent life and the killing of an evil man that wanted to do us all harm... big difference. I haven't LEARNED you a thing on this site Ex. UGH... shaking my head. Tsk tsk

Hello T:

This isn't about killing... It's about celebrating it.

excon

Well ClassyT,

I'm not sure which Bible you own but I'm almost certain you're translation (and almost positive your interpretation) is incorrect. Perhaps since the Bible pre-dates the creation of the word.

Nevetheless, I cannot disagree more with your reasons for killing, murder, whatever, or justification for celebrating.

Where do you get this hiding behind women, children, etc. stuff from? Or that 'they' are all cowards?

Do you work for Fox News?

Ex,

I was explaining why I as a pro life kind of gal doesn't think it is wrong to celebrate that we killed man that did us harm and would do us harm again if he could.

I suppose it is just semantics to say I am not celebrating his death but that justice has been done. But I am. I wouldn't wish anyone that wasn't prepared to meet God that appointment. But in all fairness, it was Osama's choice.

I don't get it. I really don't get why we can't celebrate this small but important victory without seeming like heartless people.

I'd have rejoiced over Hitler too had I been around. Evil is evil.

Yeah, that old straw man about pro-lifers celebrating death. I haven't celebrated anything but just being served. Families that lost loved to this man can have some long deserved closure. America can stand proud that we didn't give up until that justice was served and notice given that our reach is long enough to bring you to justice one way or another if you strike us.

Evil is evil.Hello again, T:

My classy friend, you've hit the nail on the head. Those three words encapsulates the argument...

IF you're of a religious bent, you believe in evil, and celebrate its demise. Being a nation made up mostly of people with a religious bent, the celebration could have been anticipated...

However, being a person NOT of a religious bent, I don't believe in evil. I didn't celebrate, and was taken aback when my fellow Americans did.

excon

War Crimes Trials (http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005140)

What happened to War crime trials? Is it only when its convient, or when there's no recession?

Was it cheaper to just shoot him?

Don't the families deserve to see a trial, questions answered?

(below text taken from above link)

' On December 17, 1942, the leaders of the United States, Great Britain, and the Soviet Union issued the first joint declaration officially noting the mass murder of European Jews and resolving to prosecute those responsible for crimes against civilian populations'

Does this still stand?

Goverments got their sh!t together then, why not now?

Wars kill people, OBL being dead does not change anything, someone else will take his place, at least with OBL there was intelligence on him, the new guy, and there will be a new guy could be the start of a whole new era in terror.

Celebrate his death, no, not for me.

The Cadets at West Point rushed out of their dorms into the common areas to 'celebrate' . Are they less 'warriors' than you ?
I celebrate the fine job the intel people and the Seals did. I celebrate life and don't think innocent life should be taken . However that isn't what we are talking about here. We are talking of the leader who initiated a war against this country some 15 years ago ;and murdered people by the thousands here and around the world. He was a weed in the garden that needed plucking .

Is justice and revenge mutually exclusive ? If there is a murder of a family member ;isn't the desire to see the murderer executed both a desire for justice and vengeance ?

For the last decade I attended funerals of brave first responders from my town ;and memorial services annually .
On my own I am not capable of extracting either justice or vengeance for what I saw on 9-11. That is why we organize into society;nations etc. When I heard the news I did celebrate the long denied justice and venegence . I celebrated that with my country.

The Cadets at West Point rushed out of their dorms into the common areas to 'celebrate' . Are they less 'warriors' than you ?Hello again, tom:

YES! They're warrior WANNABE'S. When they SEE their bullets tear apart a body, or SEE their buddies get blown away, they'll change their mind. Or not. I don't speak for them. I only know how I dealt with it. I'm sure the bloodthirsty are still amongst them.

excon

The bible actually if translated properly says..Thou shall do no murder.

America is in a war with cowards who won't stand up and fight. They attack us when we least expect it and hide behind women, children if it can save their hides. I do NOT consider the killing of Osama MURDER. He led the attack on America, HE murdered. We killed him in a WAR on terror. Go USA.

Well, anyway lets please get the Bible translated properly anyway. Thou shall do no murder. Sometimes it is appropriate to kill. we are in a WAR.

I'm not religious by no means so my apologies on misinterpreting the Bible.

Our leaders fail to name the enemy and have renamed the war on a number of occasions . I think it's now called a 'kinetic operation'or some such jibberish .

There will be no VE VJ day to run out on the streets to celebrate. There was an attempt to declare a VI day (Victory in Iraq) on Nov 22,2008 .It was unofficial ;but corresponded roughly with the 'Status of Forces' agreement signed between the US and the freely elected government of Iraq. .

Since there will be no declared end to "overseas contingency operations" ; this is the next best thing.

I am not ecstatic that a life was taken. It's a somber thing that it had to happen at all.

BUT--bin Laden was a mass-murderer, and a conspiring criminal against non-Muslim peoples. He was dangerous, and we all knew what we were in the Middle East to do. Killing him was almost inevitable.

I mourn the thousands upon thousands of innocent people who have died in pursuit of that man. And the thousands more that will probably die in pursuit of others like him.

What we do in the name of justice is gloomy. I would celebrate peace, if that were ever to happen.

War Crimes Trials (http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005140)

what happened to War crime trials? is it only when its convient, or when theres no recession?

was it cheaper to just shoot him?

dont the families deserve to see a trial, questions answered?

(below text taken from above link)

' On December 17, 1942, the leaders of the United States, Great Britain, and the Soviet Union issued the first joint declaration officially noting the mass murder of European Jews and resolving to prosecute those responsible for crimes against civilian populations'

does this still stand?

goverments got their sh!t together then, why not now?

Wars kill people, OBL being dead does not change anything, someone else will take his place, at least with OBL there was intelligence on him, the new guy, and there will be a new guy could be the start of a whole new era in terror.

celebrate his death, no, not for me.

So you disagree with the action of shooting him? You would rather have him on trial? I'm just trying to get things straight...

Milosevic was the ethnic cleansing ruler of Serbia. He went to the Hague to face war crimes. Had he not died of old age there would've been a mistrial and he'd've walked .

This Seals operation was a military action against the leader of the enemy while the war is still ongoing.As I stated on the other posting it is more similar to the downing of Yamamoto's plane.

Without his death, there is no justice. Celebrating the justice served is in turn celebrating his death is it not?

Maybe I worded the question wrong, as I see a lot of you dancing around the question. I realize it's not black and white but it's more black and white than you all think.


Am I wrong here? Am I thinking too black too white? Either you celebrated or you didn't. Please understand my interpretation of celebration. It doesn't mean you had to get tossed with buddies or throw a party. But you rejoiced in the justice, you were happy about it, you were glad to see it finally happen.

Celebrating the justice served is in turn celebrating his death is it not?Not necessarily. A family can celebrate a judge's decision that their child murderer has been sentenced to death in that justice has been served. When the person is actually put to death they don't often celebrate that moment.

Hello again, T:

My classy friend, you've hit the nail on the head. Those three words encapsulates the argument...

IF you're of a religious bent, you believe in evil, and celebrate its demise. Being a nation made up mostly of people with a religious bent, the celebration could have been anticipated...

However, being a person NOT of a religious bent, I don't believe in evil. I didn't celebrate, and was taken aback when my fellow Americans did.

excon

Hmmm? You don't have to be religious ( which I am NOT religious... I'm a christian) to know evil is in this world. Hitler ordered the deaths of millions just because they were Jewish, Osama ordered of the death of thousands just because of what they stood for and you don't see evil in that? You didn't see evil when you watched innocent people willingly jump to their deaths rather than burn? What DID you see?

When someone does you personally dirty or wrong... you don't believe it? It isn't evil? How about the post I read where you were outraged by how an african american was treated on a bus. If I recall correctly, you got into a fight over it. Why is that Steve?. because there is no evil in this world? If there is no wrong or right... why fight? It wasn't your JOB then. It was your choice. I'm not buying exy so you shouldn't be selling it. ;) just saying.

What choices do we get in addition to "celebrate"?

Not necessarily. A family can celebrate a judge's decision that their child murderer has been sentenced to death in that justice has been served. When the person is actually put to death they don't often celebrate that moment.

You are correct but that isn't the case here. The only justice that can be found out of this situation is his death. There was no trial, no capture, no explanation of past actions, just his death. So to say you celebrate the justice is in turn celebrating his death because that's all we have.

hmmm? you don't have to be religious ( which i am NOT religious....I'm a christian) to know evil is in this world. Hitler ordered the deaths of millions just because they were Jewish, Osama ordered of the death of thousands just because of what they stood for and you don't see evil in that? you didn't see evil when you watched innocent people willingly jump to their deaths rather than burn? What DID you see?

When someone does you personally dirty or wrong...you don't believe it? It isn't evil? How bout the post I read where you were outraged by how an african american was treated on a bus. If i recall correctly, you got into a fight over it. why is that Steve?...because there is no evil in this world? If there is no wrong or right...why fight? It wasn't your JOB then. It was your choice. I'm not buyin exy so you shouldn't be sellin it. ;) just sayin.

Steve? Who's Steve :D

Well ClassyT,

I'm not sure which Bible you own but I'm almost certain you're translation (and almost positive your interpretation) is incorrect. Perhaps since the Bible pre-dates the creation of the word.

Nevetheless, I cannot disagree more with your reasons for killing, murder, whatever, or justification for celebrating.

Where do you get this hiding behind women, children, etc. stuff from? Or that 'they' are all cowards?

Do you work for Fox News?

It isn't incorrect. Thou shalt not murder is the proper translation. I really don't think it is up for debate. And murder covers a slew of things.. including hatred which is where murder REALLY begins.

Anyway, I don't mean to get off on a tangent. I don't think we should party and celebrate for weeks over this. But I see NOTHING wrong with a few WHOOT WHOOTs and hearty congrats to our troops and maybe even doing a little silly dance. Osama meant us harm at best and played a 10 year hide and seek game. One of our missions was to get him, we did. Why NOT celebrate.

The terriorist ARE cowards. Osama hid in a compound... what do you call him? Misguided? Ugh

No.. I don't work for Fox news. Although that wasn't insulting to me if that is what you meant it to be. I'm just an American woman with an opinion. Right or wrong.

What choices do we get in addition to "celebrate"?

Whatever your heart desires...

But you rejoiced in the justice, you were happy about it, you were glad to see it finally happen.Hello again, IT:

Everyone wants to see the bad guy get his... The question is, was his killing "justice". That's a much larger question.

It's not whether he deserved it, or whether he was a bad guy. It's whether we are a nation of laws. Do we kill unarmed civilians? IS he a civilian? Do we assassinate foreign leaders? IS he a foreign leader? Was the purpose of the mission to KILL? Does the authorization to use force that Bush went to war with allow us to target Bin Laden?

Look. I don't pretend to know the answers to these questions... But, they need answering. Yes, he deserved it. Was it justice? It doesn't feel real good - him being UNARMED and not resisting..

excon

Many of the young people who showed up in Washington, C.D.'s Lafayette Park right after the announcement on Sunday evening were probably under 15 years of age when the Towers were attacked. I didn't understand their jumping up and down and flag waving. It was almost like, "Oh, there's a party in the park, the weather is good, so let's go!!"

"Celebrate" is the wrong word for this. I'm not sure I know what an appropriate one is. Will have to think on that.

Many of the young people who showed up in Washington, C.D.'s Lafayette Park right after the announcement on Sunday evening were probably under 15 years of age when the Towers were attacked. I didn't understand their jumping up and down and flag waving. It was almost like, "Oh, there's a party in the park, the weather is good, so let's go!!"

"Celebrate" is the wrong word for this. I'm not sure I know what an appropriate one is. Will have to think on that.

I was exactly 15 when it happened. I didn't really understand all of the implications, but I knew it was bad and I knew that I was upset at the terrorists.

Since then, I've grown up more and learned more about the world. All I've known my entire teen and adult life is this war or whatever it's called today against terrorism.

I was just a child playing with American Girl Dolls when there wasn't a conflict with the Taliban. So... while it's all I know, I certainly know about it. I don't think that all the young people are just partying-they, like me, like you, like most everyone, are sick of terrorism and sick of the fighting.

I'm relieved that one of our greatest enemies has been brought to justice.

Is relieved an okay adjective? Even if it's a little insensitive to human life?

Maybe that is the word we need to substitute for celebration. Relieved.

Is it wrong to feel relief from the death of a human life? IF they deserved it?

Deserving death is relative though. As stated earlier by myself the Bible says though shall not kill (or murder or whatever) but the Qu`ran says kill the infadels. To us he deserved it, to "them" he did not. This leads me back to "is might right"?

We can bounce questions back and forth all day and too be honest, I would love to but lets answer some of these first ones before we answer more.

Exy: Was it justice? I think so. As stated by myself earlier there was no trial, no questions, explanations, no prison-time, etc... just death. It's the only thing we have, the only thing we can get a sense of justice out of. (IMO)

P.S. I was 14 on 9/11

For the soldiers that shot him, I've no problem there, that's their job, they got their orders and carried it through.

If he had been captured and was being brought to justice,being brought to trial, that would have been worth celebrating.

I'm" relieved" when a terriorist attack is twarted. I celebrated when we got osama. But that is just me. I won't be politically correct here. There is a time for celebration. It doesn't have to be an inappropriate celebration. There CAN be a difference.

Exy,

This is a war on terror not a war on another country. Are there clear cut rules when this war is unlike any others? We don't always even know who are enemies are here. I don't know if Osama was armed or not armed but I DO know he could have arranged for the last 9 1/2 years to surrender peacefully. He chose not to. It isn't like he had no other choices to consider over the YEARS.

Oh well, I guess I'm a cold harded witch. I celebrated. Justice was served. I'm moving on...

but the Qu`ran says kill the infadels. To us he deserved it, to "them" he did not. This leads me back to "is might right"?Hello again, Rick:

That's not the right question... Obviously, we were right before we had the might. So, we don't succumb to what the world thinks is right, because the world is WRONG. Might's got nothing to do with it.

excon

There was no trial, no capture, no explanation of past actions, just his death.


It's not like these were ambiguous . He declared the "Islamist" equivalence of war on the US with his 1998 Fatwah .
Al Qaeda's 1998 Fatwa | PBS NewsHour | Feb. 23, 1998 | PBS (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/terrorism/international/fatwa_1998.html)
From that point on until this week he waged war on the US . This is a no brainer unless someone gets into those grey areas where right and wrong get blurred... and definitions of war and law enforcement twisted beyond recognition .

Once he made this declaration of war, and began acting on it, he was a legitimate military target.This was simply cutting the head off the snake.
Is al-Qaeda a nation state ? Not in the classic Westphalian sense. But the Westphalian era is a brief moment in time . The truth is that until they were broken up and forced to change to a decentralized loose group of cells ;there was command and control... and Bin Laden was the top of the organization.

if he had been captured and was being brought to justice,being brought to trial, that would have been worth celebrating.
Just for fun --

Where would he have been jailed?
Where would he have been tried?
Who would have been his defense lawyers?
Sentence of life in prison or execution?
Who would have taken him as prisoner and where, or executed him?

Just for fun --

where would he have been jailed?
where would he have been tried?
who would have been his defense lawyers?
sentence of life in prison or execution?
who would have taken him as prisoner and where, or executed him?Same as Saddam?

Just for fun --

where would he have been jailed?
where would he have been tried?
who would have been his defense lawyers?
sentence of life in prison or execution?
who would have taken him as prisoner and where, or executed him?

And the same people who call for a trial would then accuse the US of conducting a show trial. Obama wanted KSM tried in civilian court and passed judgement on him before a venue was selected... and told the world he would be either convicted or held forever anyway.
The scary truth is that the US does not take prisoners in this war anymore because POTUS waffles on detention. So his answer is to shoot to kill .

Just for fun --

where would he have been jailed?
where would he have been tried?
who would have been his defense lawyers?
sentence of life in prison or execution?
who would have taken him as prisoner and where, or executed him?

I'm sure there would have been a flurry of defense lawyers vying for the case, known serial murderers have defense lawyers, some of the best.

If the americans captured him I'm sure they would have held tight and put up one hell of a fight to try him in america,and keep him there as long as possible,ironically he would have been 'safer ' there,or at least kept alive until trial ( I can feel the ice shift beneath my feet!) the trial would have been one for the history books.

Eventually I suppose he would have been tried in the Hague, under international law as to what would become of him is anyone's guess, from the dredges of memory I recall a american defense lawyer made a case for a german officer based on the fact that even though he sent the order to kill thousands of jews, he did not directly have any involvement in the deaths i.e, the direct torture and killing of jews in any camps, however in saying that, at the time of the geneva convention there was an absence of any precedent, I would have to Google a while to make an educated guess as too whether he would eventually be killed anyway.

This is all a little too PC for me. I have strong feelings about what muslim terrorists have done throughout the world.

I see nothing wrong with celebrating the death of tyrants and there are people who have good reason the celebrate the death of this tyrant. I will not critise them

I don't think there is anything wrong with celebrating bin Ladin's death. Yeah, he was human , but he did inhumane things.. and that kind of cancels out the human part.

Hello again, Rick:

That's not the right question... Obviously, we were right before we had the might. So, we don't succumb to what the world thinks is right, because the world is WRONG. Might's got nothing to do with it.

excon

Whether that's the right question or not is superfluous. What matters is that's MY question. Might has everything to do with it. At what point is the line drawn? Just because might is majority does that make them right?

The reason I brought this up was because a coworker had said (another paraphrase)

"Well, if we got a poll, on who thought what he did was right and what he did was wrong, it would be split (or close to it)"

Now, even if we included the radical Islamics in this poll, I feel the vast majority would see the wrong that was done by OBL. Now, this made me think, just because the majority thinks something does that make it right?

I realize this has nothing to do with my original question and to be honest I am one who see's the wrong that was done but it made me think...

IT,


It isn't even about right or wrong morally. It isn't about majority and it certainly isn't about might. What OBL did was mastermind an act of WAR on this country. He had thousands killed... and NOT because they provoked it they were simply going about their lives. This is a FACT. If there is a split decision on whether these actions were right or wrong.. then God help us all.

And NO, just because a majority thinks a certain way... it does NOT make it right. I am a woman who believes that there IS absolute truth and there IS a right way and a wrong way. This is the biggest problem I see, no one believes that anymore. If there is no truth and no evil and no standard... we are all doomed.

Course I know you didn't ask me that question IT... but I couldn't resist.

I just wonder if he's enjoying his 72 hot babes.

IT,


It isn't even about right or wrong morally. It isn't about majority and it certainly isn't about might. What OBL did was mastermind an act of WAR on this country. He had thousands killed....and NOT because they provoked it they were simply going about their lives. This is a FACT. If there is a split decision on whether these actions were right or wrong..then God help us all.

And NO, just because a majority thinks a certain way...it does NOT make it right. I am a woman who believes that there IS absolute truth and there IS a right way and a wrong way. This is the biggest problem I see, no one believes that anymore. If there is no truth and no evil and no standard...we are all doomed.

course I know you didn't ask me that question IT....but i couldn't resist.

1. This all started from a paraphrase which means I did not say it.
2. The might vs right idea was from a co-worker, not me
3. You can say it isn't about this and isn't about that all day and too be honest it's not FACT, it's OPINION. In their eyes, he did right. In your eyes he was a monster...

NOTE: I am not pro OBL believe me, I simply like argueing.

Back in business...

IT, He had thousands killed....and NOT because they provoked it they were simply going about their lives. This is a FACT.

This is not a fact.

IT, He had thousands killed....and NOT because they provoked it they were simply going about their lives. This is a FACT.

This is not a fact.
Please explain.

Gladly.

1. Either of you do not know the extent of OBL's involvement in the attacks. To pin every murder on him and him alone is not based on fact, rather assumption.

2. You refer to the people in the towers not provoking the attack. I agree. However, you use them as a further argument about the evils of OBL. While the act (whomever responsible) was pure evil it is not only those in the tower that were defenceless but the thousands of Iraqis/Afgahns who were killed as a result of the U.S led invasion of both countries. Furthermore, OBL would probably argue he had plenty of provocation to attack the U.S. right or wrong. He did not select the U.S out of a hat.

I include the second part because I read plenty of posts on here suggesting that the East's hatred of the West was brought about by nothing more than a whim. It most certainly consisted of more than that, to be fair. It also seems like the 'patriots' have no issues when the Americans do the Same thing overseas but judge very quickly when done to them.

Nevertheless, the original point:

BMI injures his foot. He seeks medical advice. The doctor asks him questions, he answers. The doctor performs tests. The doctor examines the results of said tests and shows them to BMI. The doctor says "BMI you handsome lad, you have a broken foot". This is a fact.

Conversely:

BMI injures his foot and asks his friend to look at it. His friend says "BMI you ugly son of a B****, it certainly looks like you've broken your foot". This is not a fact.

In summation: Establish the facts before shooting the doctor in the face and then you may report them as such.

1. Either of you do not know the extent of OBL's involvement in the attacks. To pin every murder on him and him alone is not based on fact, rather assumption.
OBL bragged about his causing the attacks on the Towers, and slapped his knee in glee that the Towers had completely collapsed when he had planned only that they would be destroyed from the points of impact and upward.

2. You refer to the people in the towers not provoking the attack. I agree. However, you use them as a further argument about the evils of OBL. While the act (whomever responsible) was pure evil it is not only those in the tower that were defenceless but the thousands of Iraqis/Afgahns who were killed as a result of the U.S led invasion of both countries. Furthermore, OBL would probably argue he had plenty of provocation to attack the U.S. right or wrong. He did not select the U.S out of a hat.
He attacked first. Afghanistan and Iraq (which had nothing to do with OBL) came later.

He was quoted as saying he wanted to crush America's economy.

"We love death. The U.S. loves life. That is the difference between us two." ~Osama bin Laden

"Hostility toward America is a religious duty, and we hope to be rewarded for it by God . . . . I am confident that Muslims will be able to end the legend of the so-called superpower that is America." ~Osama Bin Laden

Afghanistan and Iraq (which had nothing to do with OBL)

So you think our "invasion" of these two countries had NOTHING to do with OBL? Or are you saying these two countries in their entirety had nothing to do with OBL?

Again, bragging or reacting to the towers falling is not an admission of guilt concerning the murder of 3,000 people! Furthermore, these questions are for the courts to decide.Many heads of the mafia are 'suspected' in the death of pretty much everyone their 'crew' murders (and in many ways you could argue they are indirectly or directly involved), yet they are not convicted of every one. That is the judicial system, it was invented for a purpose. Seems, no seemed, like an appropriate event in which to use that system, no? Just because you didn't, don't fill in the blanks with comments that have no merit in your own country's courts of law.

Your second comment: Your child is being harassed by a bully for years and years. One day, he hits back. The bully proceeds to beat him up real bad!! You on board with that?

Also, what do you mean had nothing to do with it? Innocent people in the towers were killed, we know that. Innocent people were killed by the U.S military overseas, we know that. Who's better?

Lastly, I was quoted last week saying I wanted to strangle my ex-girlfriend.

So you think our "invasion" of these two countries had NOTHING to do with OBL?0
Afghanistan, yes. Iraq, no.

I talk about robbing banks everyday of my life. I talk about this to my family, friends and co-workers...

Then one day our local bank is robbed...

You're quick to point fingers at me but did I really do it?

I think that is the point BMI is trying to make! Correct me if I am wrong!

Afghanistan, yes. Iraq, no.

You believe in the WMD?

Again, bragging or reacting to the towers falling is not an admission of guilt concerning the murder of 3,000 people!
"Bin Laden claims responsibility for 9/11". CBC News. October 29, 2004. Bin Laden claims responsibility for 9/11 - World - CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2004/10/29/binladen_message041029.html). Retrieved January 11, 2009. "al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden appeared in a new message aired on an Arabic TV station Friday night, for the first time claiming direct responsibility for the 2001 attacks against the United States."

You believe in the WMD?
I have no clue what your question means.

You said Yes to Afghanistan and No to Iraq. I was just wondering if you believed the invasion of Iraq was indeed for WMD?

This is not a fact.

Ok BMI. Have it your way. Just because he was behind taking down the twin towers and crashing planes on 9/11 doesn't make him a terrorist or our enemy. It was not an act of War on the United States. Osama was just a religious guy expressing his religious views. The USA was out of line to go after him and to kill him. To celebrate it was inappropriate. He was framed. Sorry, my mistake.

:rolleyes:

You said Yes to Afghanistan and No to Iraq. I was just wondering if you believed the invasion of Iraq was indeed for WMD?
Absolutely not!

Absolutely not!

So the Iraq invasion wasn't for OBL or WMD... can I ask what you believe it was for?

So the Iraq invasion wasn't for OBL or WMD... can I ask what you believe it was for?
Why do I feel like I'm being set up?

What do YOU think it was for?

I am not setting you up. Simply conversing.

I BELIEVE it was a culmination of the threat posed to the U.S. and its allies by Saddam Hussein's alleged programs of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and the possibility that he would pass along those arms to al Qaeda (OBL) also to avenge his father's failure to achieve a lasting victory over Saddam and more particularly his desire to get back at Saddam for an alleged assassination attempt against former President Bush Sr. in 1993... I also, think as a society we wanted some form of revenge for what happened on 9/11. We didn't want to sit and just take it, so actions were taken to gain some form of justice.

Although the name of this war has changed many times and the motive behind it... I do believe OBL was a target/mission throughout the entirety from the beginning!

I think that is the point BMI is trying to make! Correct me if I am wrong!

For the most part. But IT, don't rob the bank, I beg you:)

I believe the invasion of Iraq was totally uncalled for, that we didn't give the inspectors enough time. I said that to my son and husband when Colin Powell was making his presentations. I still believe diplomatic tactics should have been used. President Bush invaded on the excuse that Saddam had WMD and, later, to bring democracy to the nation. We now know how those "reasons" have worked out.

alleged programs lol

A month before the invasion the chief UN inspector reported that despite all the warnings ,resolutions and sanctions there was still no acceptable accounting of Iraqs known WMD program and weapons.

The US was attacked with anthrax shortly after 9-11 . As I stated on another posting... there was a huge gap in what we knew of the enemy who had just killed almost 3000 Americans.

I'll remind you that it was al-Qaeda that decided to make the Iraq battlefield the central front in their war against us. It is them that are responsible for most of the civilian casualties in Iraq as they were the ones that instigated the ethnic civil war in the country. The Iraq war ended as a front against al-Qaeda when the Sunni chiefs realized that Al-Qaeda was brutalizing them as much as the Shia ,and turned on them.

I believe the invasion of Iraq was totally uncalled for, that we didn't give the inspectors enough time. I said that to my son and husband when Colin Powell was making his presentations. I still believe diplomatic tactics should have been used. President Bush invaded on the excuse that Saddam had WMD and, later, to bring democracy to the nation. We now know how those "reasons" have worked out.

Iraq today is a free independent nation ;has had a number of democratic elections ,and is also free of the jackboot of Saddam's tyranny ,and free of WMD. The lead up to the war lasted over a year ;and the UN pursuit for accountability for Saddam's WMD program was a decade+ . How much time did he need ? Even when Clintoon did a 4 day bombing campaign in 1998 he still wouldn't come clean.

"Bin Laden claims responsibility for 9/11". CBC News. October 29, 2004. Bin Laden claims responsibility for 9/11 - World - CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2004/10/29/binladen_message041029.html). Retrieved January 11, 2009. "al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden appeared in a new message aired on an Arabic TV station Friday night, for the first time claiming direct responsibility for the 2001 attacks against the United States."

Again, who cares how many headlines you produce! Even if he did claim responsibility! He, as in his 'company' (he being the CEO, lets say) took responsibility. You have to adjudge what the extent of his involvement was.

I'm amazed, there are tons of credible reporters from the East and West breaking down and researching what role OBL actually had within the organization. Some say he was just a figurehead, some an advisor, yet many agree he was not at all the head of any snake. I think many people would like to know that answer, wouldn't you? Instead, all we have is speculation that he was the biggest and baddest threat ever to humankind:rolleyes: Just like Saddam (the world is so much less violent, isn't it?) or his WMD's that, whew, they got to just in time! 'cause for a long time there I was re-evaluating my life's path and all that I could have done better!

Saddam got taken out because what he did was absolutely no different than a convict out on Parole taunting his Parole officer.

He did beg for a cease fire... and that meant he was on probation... not pardoned.

As far as OBL... I'm IRKED a photo of his dead corpse wasn't released so I could do the second best thing of defecating and urinating on it. First best would have been having a chance to do it to his corpse. But the line of people waiting to do that would have been really, really long.

I feel there is ABSOLUTELY nothing wrong with feeling that way given who he was, and what he has done... and what he was trying to do..

Ok BMI. have it your way. Just because he was behind taking down the twin towers and crashing planes on 9/11 doesn't make him a terrorist or our enemy. It was not an act of War on the United States. Osama was just a religious guy expressing his religious views. The USA was out of line to go after him and to kill him. To celebrate it was inappropriate. He was framed. sorry, my mistake.

:rolleyes:

Ok ClassyT. Just because you believe everything told to you by your very own government which has never falsified any account of any historical event to ever take place on its soil, doesn't make you naïve. The United States is the friendliest nation towards all others and always has been. Bush was just a religious guy expressing his religious views. The USA is NEVER out of line and certainly didn't convince you that the WMD's in Iraq didn't exist, nor did they alter your opinion of their advance when it turned out they did'nt exist... oops (How come I feel like I just told a kid Santa does not exist?) You should most definitely celebrate death, your good enough;)

Again, who cares how many headlines you produce! Even if he did claim responsiblity! He, as in his 'company' (he being the CEO, lets say) took responsibility. You have to adjudge what the extent of his involvement was.
You want him to have been flying one of the planes? Isn't architect good enough?

Who's responsible for the house you live in? The architect? The general contractor? The construction crew? The roofers? The plumbers? The electricians?

Who originally designed it and plotted it out? All of those?

What are we discussing here? I get so turned around on these things:mad:

What are we discussing here? I get so turned around on these things:mad:

You know how threads develop a mind of their own and go places we never expect around here.

You know what, I REJOICED when Bellatrix Lestrange and Voldemort were killed in Harry Potter 7.

I guess I am a little immoral.

That is very true...

You know what, I REJOICED when Bellatrix Lestrange and Voldemort were killed in Harry Potter 7.

I guess I am a little immoral.

Thanks for ruining it for me!

Thanks for ruining it for me!

Oh no!

I'm so sorry... blonde moment where I forgot some people only watch the movies.

Forget I said it, it doesn't actually happen.

It's Sauron that dies. And Darth Vader.

I was kidding. I don't watch that stuff and I can't read so books are a no-go.

I could have been serious (or acted like it) and made you feel bad...

You want him to have been flying one of the planes? Isn't architect good enough?

Who's responsible for the house you live in? the architect? the general contractor? the construction crew? the roofers? the plumbers? the electricians?

Who originally designed it and plotted it out? all of those?

YOU have no authority to determine he is any of the above! Architect is NOT good enough, you need to establish that he is the architect, or the plumber, or the realtor, or builder before you exact your punishment on him!

Are you really that unfamiliar with how crime organizations (and some 'legitamate' ones) operate? Sheesh, you seem to take everything you hear as fact and then comment on what the appropriate punishment should be. When, in fact, you do not seem to subscibe to the judicial process nor the route in which one should navigate through that process.

I don't even know what your saying anymore? OBL was the head, according to you. You shot him and he is now dead. What, praytell, are the other punishments bestowed on the other participants? The conspirators, the aides, the other top dogs, the backers behind billions in support money, the Pakistani officials? Bullet in the face? Trial?

I ask because one could easily argue the others had the same if not more involvement than OBL in the attacks so, according to the WONDERful judicial process you've now created, how are you to deal with them if you catch them? Question them, determine their role and... oh wait... you don't do that, sorry.

YOU have no authority to determine he is any of the above! Architect is NOT good enough, you need to establish that he is the architect
He himself said he was.

I was kidding. I don't watch that stuff and I can't read so books are a no-go.

I could have been serious (or acted like it) and made you feel bad...

You could have had a lot of fun with that, too. I'm super gullible and am easily guilted to boot.

Thanks for being kind :)

BMI- SO what is your stance on this whole OBL situation. Do you agree with the shooting? Celebration? etc...

P.S. Where are you from? (simply curious)

IT - I disagree with the shooting and I am not comfortable with the celebration. If he was captured alive, we'd know the whole story. The fact that they killed him, buried the body and did not provide any evidence of the event, brings the whole operation into disrepute.

I'm from Toronto, Canada.

If he was captured alive, we'd know the whole story.
How do you figure that would work out?

He himself said he was.

Ever hear of the label 'fall guy'. Common tactic gang members and the mafia employ when their top dogs are being tried for certain crimes. The lower level 'employees' admit to the crimes and the bosses walk.

Is OBL the fall guy in all of this? I doubt it, I think he did play a role. However, in order to establish the validity of these claims and given scenarios, you conduct trials. At trial they examine evidence, they piece together the events and corroborate it with evidence and testimony. Only then can you get a clear(er) picture of what actually happened.

In the absence of the above, a man was shot in the face because it was WIDELY believed he killed 3000 people. He did what he did, how he did it because they said that's how it happened:rolleyes:.

I mentioned I'm from Canada. Years back we had a man accused of murdering a child. The country WIDELY believed he was guilty without question. They conducted a trial and the evidence pointed towards him. He was convicted. Many years later, he was released. 100% innocent of the crime due to DNA testing.

Imagine, all that proof and evidence and support for his conviction (not to mention what he was called and considered amongst the population and in prison) and he was innocent all along. Now consider, OBL being 'convicted' and sentenced to a bullet through his head without any of that process. Also take into account other 'strange happenings' in America in the past, WMD's, the magic bullet. Then, finally, mix that with the what, 8 different versions we've already heard of the killing, the peculiarities surrounding the very honest and respectful burial granted and the pictures and video that were taken but never released. I ask, is that just cause for killing him?

How do you figure that would work out?

Good question, let's ask him... damn!

Good question, let's ask him...........damn!
Yeah, like making him a batch of fudgy brownies (or raspberry baklava) would have encouraged him to tell all.

I guess we will never know? I suppose that's why I am such a proponent of NOT killing someone before bringing them to trial.

I guess we will never know? I suppose that's why I am such a proponent of NOT killing someone before bringing them to trial.
Good to be a proponent of such.

Ok ClassyT. Just because you believe everything told to you by your very own government which has never falsified any account of any historical event to ever take place on its soil, doesn't make you naive. The United States is the friendliest nation towards all others and always has been. Bush was just a religious guy expressing his religious views. The USA is NEVER out of line and certainly didn't convince you that the WMD's in Iraq didn't exist, nor did they alter your opinion of their advance when it turned out they did'nt exist...oops (How come I feel like i just told a kid Santa does not exist?) You should most definetly celebrate death, your good enough;)

Hello? BMI... you go to far. I never claimed any of the above... you assume and you know what happends when someone assumes.

HOWEVER, it IS one of the funniest posts I've read on this site. Interesting that you are MORE than willing to give OBL the benefit of the doubt but you've got ME all figured out and judged according to your small minded assumptions. Here is a wild and crazy thought... Why don't you extend to me the same courtesy you have osama? The hypocrisy of your post would be laughable, if it weren't so UNbelievable.

Slam dunk... Classy take a victory lap... and spike the ball!!

In the absence of the above, a man was shot in the face because it was WIDELY beleived he killed 3000 people. He did what he did, how he did it because they said that's how it happened.
"They" didn't say anything. HE said he did it.

He had the opportunity to surrender. He decided not to.

slam dunk ....Classy take a victory lap.... and spike the ball !!!!!

Tom,

You think I'm "good enough" to dance during the victory lap. I'm STILL shaking my head. :)

Wait!! I'm being accused of assuming things? Wait! You didn't get the purpose of using your original post to prove my point? Wait! I'm a hypocrite?

Please tell me this is not the same ClassyT that earlier argued the Bible actually reads "Thou shall not murder"!!

Also, please tell me that the poster above me didn't just agree with her drivel? Thus demonstrating his very base volleyball skills.

No, no, it is I who was, and still is, laughing.

Without his death, there is no justice. Celebrating the justice served is in turn celebrating his death is it not?


Its is mournful anytime a life has to be taken. It is even more painful when innocent life is taken. But when dealing with things in the world there is a system in place to do so. It is born of the same regiment that our soldiers train for. The systems that are in place have thought to have been broken. In this case it is seen as the system actually working. The people entrusted to do the job actually doing it. That is something to celebrate. We are all born of circumstance and its art of our lifes journey. Good bad and the rest of it. The bottom line is we all make decisions. And in turn those lead us down a path in life to whatever outcome it may be. So taking a life is nothing to celebrate but having the system work as it is suppose to is.

That my friend is a justification that you will be facing when you deploy. The enemy has mnay faces and it will be your job to decide the outcomes. That is what the sysyem is demanding of you and all of us that support you and others like you (seal teams and the reguler boots on the ground). Its because of the commitments of our servicemen that we can all be proud to be Americans and give thanks that we can speak freely.

I always give thanks to those that have and are serving our country. And as General Patton said: Its not up to you to give your life for this country... Its up to you to take thiers for they are the enemy.

Interesting that you are MORE than willing to give OBL the benefit of the doubt but you've got ME all figured out and judged according to your small minded assumptions. Here is a wild and crazy thought...Why don't you extend to me the same courtesy you have osama? The hypocrisy of your post would be laughable, if it weren't so UNbelievable.

The benefit of the doubt? I'm arguing that he should have been brought to trial, not set free. You are of the position he should have been shot without trial. That is the precedent you are supporting and arguing should be the norm, I suppose. Bah, even your own justice system disagrees with you, but you do have Tom so...

Courtesy I have for Osama? Spoken like a true 'patriot' without a clue or understanding of what it is my position is or what this 'argument' is even about, but finds it hysterical.

Also take into account other 'strange happenings' in America in the past, WMD's, the magic bullet. Then, finally, mix that with the what, 8 different versions we've already heard of the killing, the peculiarities surrounding the very honest and respectful burial granted and the pictures and video that were taken but never released. I ask, is that just cause for killing him?

Maybe there is a Santa Claus :

Wikileaks documents show WMDs found in Iraq Hot Air (http://hotair.com/archives/2010/10/24/wikileaks-documents-show-wmds-found-in-iraq/)

Report: Hundreds of WMDs Found in Iraq - U.S. Senate - FOXNews.com (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html)

American Thinker Blog: Wikileaks proves WMD found in Iraq (http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/10/wikileaks_proves_wmd_found_in.html)

Hundreds of WMDs discovered in Iraq (http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50746)

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/wmdsfound.html

Maybe there is a Santa Claus :

Wikileaks documents show WMDs found in Iraq Hot Air (http://hotair.com/archives/2010/10/24/wikileaks-documents-show-wmds-found-in-iraq/)

Report: Hundreds of WMDs Found in Iraq - U.S. Senate - FOXNews.com (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html)

American Thinker Blog: Wikileaks proves WMD found in Iraq (http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/10/wikileaks_proves_wmd_found_in.html)

Hundreds of WMDs discovered in Iraq (http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50746)

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/wmdsfound.html

LOL! You sourced Fox News! Quick, go up on your roof and look down your chimney.

LOL! You sourced Fox News! Quick, go up on your roof and look down your chimney.

What's super funny about this is that as soon as I saw califdad source fox news, I KNEW that would be your only comment.

Predictable, predictable, predictable.

Now that I'm thoroughly nauseated, I hereby unsubscribe.

LOL! You sourced Fox News! Quick, go up on your roof and look down your chimney.

So many sources to choose from. There are hundreds of links like those and video on YouTube. So deny all you like. Also Sadam did use WMD's against his own people. Or is that yet another fabrication?

With your previouse post you sound like a card carrying member of the tin foil hat crowd. So no evidence is good enough for you anyway.

^ Another one.

Maybe because Fox News is known around most parts as being, unreputable. Shocking you'd comment yet not know that?

I hope you feel better.

^ Another one.

Maybe because Fox News is known around most parts as being, unreputable. Shocking you'd comment yet not know that?

I hope you feel better.

Where is your source stating that they never report the story correctly and report the facts?

At least I showed just a portion of what's out there. So either show some sources where it shows as consistent or lets get back on topic.

So many sources to choose from. There are hundreds of links like those and video on youtube. So deny all you like. Also Sadam did use WMD's against his own people. Or is that yet another fabrication ??

With your previouse post you sound like a card carrying member of the tin foil hat crowd. So no evidence is good enough for you anyway.

The post before was not directed at you, to clarify. This one is:)

You're an expert internet researcher correct? So is it necessary to tell you that I can easily find articles which say they didn't exist? You think?

To save me from doing that, are you aware that the majority of American people polled believe no WMD's existed in Iraq and it was just an excuse to invade? Were you aware, if not, maybe check the internet, apparently you know allllll about it functionality.

No evidence is good enough for me? Kind of like the evidence prooving they did kill Osama? Is that the threshold?

I'm out. Can't argue with the 'patriots' and I have this nagging suspicion they get none of my clever jokes. NOTE! Please don't respond with predicatable answers, SouthAmerica is already not feeling too well:(

Where is your source stating that they never report the story correctly and report the facts?

I have this very strong feeling that you are not really an internet researcher. However, I do, without doubt, believe you are American (amoungst many other things).

The post before was not directed at you, to clarify. This one is:)

You're an expert internet researcher correct? So is it necessary to tell you that I can easily find articles which say they didn't exist? You think?

To save me from doing that, are you aware that the majority of American people polled beleive no WMD's existed in Iraq and it was just an excuse to invade? Were you aware, if not, maybe check the internet, apparently you know allllll about it functionality.

No evidence is good enough for me? Kinda like the evidence prooving they did kill Osama? Is that the threshold?

I'm out. Can't argue with the 'patriots' and I have this nagging suspicion they get none of my clever jokes. NOTE! Please don't respond with predicatable answers, SouthAmerica is already not feeling too well:(

Your wrong again. Sorry. At a minimum during the time they were still finding the WMD's there was at least 50% that believed they existed. And that's from a poll in 2006. Before the WIKIleaks.

And they were still finding them in 2008. And here is your complimentary picture to go with it.

Poll: 50% of Americans believe Iraq had WMDs. (http://acapella.harmony-central.com/showthread.php?1321110-Poll-50-of-Americans-believe-Iraq-had-WMDs)

50 percent of U.S. says Iraq had WMDs - Washington Times (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2006/jul/24/20060724-110410-8309r/)

WikiLeaks Show WMD Hunt Continued in Iraq – With Surprising Results | Danger Room | Wired.com (http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/10/wikileaks-show-wmd-hunt-continued-in-iraq-with-surprising-results/)

I have this very strong feeling that you are not really an internet researcher. However, I do, without doubt, beleive you are American (amoungst many other things).

Seems that doubt is the only thing you have said that can be qualified. :)

Um... odd that the entire body of congress was briefed on that evidence... the same briefing the leadership got earlier.

It's the same stuff and conclusions our Allies got from their own intelligence agencies.

Canada got 200 tons of yellow-cake uranium from Iraq for processing (just a precursor to the really dangerous stuff), Wiki-leaks showed documents that WMD's were transported to Syria...

And then there is the WMD's (poison gas in this case) that was used on the Kurds.


And just because its posted on the internet doesn't mean its factual. Hardly any internet posts back anything up with real evidence ( and quoting another source that isn't backed up... isn't backing it up.)... and much of the drive by media does little better.

Rathergate as one example of where evidence was fabricated by CBS to support a story they way they wanted to report it since reality didn't back them up..

Nothing wrong with being a healthy skeptic... there is a lot of false information and intentional misdirection on the internet... as well as in the newspapers and on TV.

Everyone wants to tell it the way they wish it was, rather than the way it is.

You convinced me. The Obots have muddled the narrative so badly that nothing they say is believable . I can sign onto that . So here's my best guess.
1. Since AQ has confirmed that
OBL got wacked ;we can believe them if not the Obots... right ?

2. Do I believe he got the ultimate water-boarding?? Nah ! The President's religion is basketball and despite his rhetoric of finding the Muslim call to prayer one of the sweetest sounds he's ever heard ;I think it more likely that it never happened... That's why he won't release photos of OBL dressed in the Shroud of Turin.

More likely these copters originated from an Afghan air base and that's where they landed... not 500 nautical miles away taking the risk of a mid air refueling over Pakistan air space.
I think OBL doesn't have a watery grave at all. I think he was jetisoned like so much balast over the Hindu Kush and will soon have a snowy grave .

Can I take off my tinfoil hat now ?

First, I agree this was not a time for celebration. I don't believe we should celebrate anyone's death. I said this on the other thread.

In fact, I am getting more and more concerned about this operation. The latest admission from the govt indicates that this was a straight out assassination. Michael Moore said that he believes our country "has lost its soul". I tend to agree with this. I had no problem with killing OBL if he was defending himself. But to kill him outright was wrong.

I do have some other things to say.

Specifically to BMI. As I just said I would agree that he should have been brought to trial. But I really don't get where you come upon your disbelief in his guilt. As noted HE ADMITTED HIS INVOLVEMENT. I have never seen any credible reports disputing his own admission of guilt. There is more than sufficient evidence that OBL was the leader of Al Qaeda and had primary responsibility for ordering the 9/11 attacks along with other terrorist attacks.

This also justifies, in my opinion, the invasion of Afghanistan. It is pretty clear that OBL was being protected by them. On the other hand, the invasion of Iraq was more about gaining control of oil and revenge for Hussein's thumbing his nose at the US. Hussein badly underestimated Bush and it caused his downfall. Terrorism was just an excuse. Bush felt the time was right to get public approval of finishing the job his father didn't.

Another point. The comparison between the celebrations of the end of WWII and killing OBL are not really valid. The end of WWI was an end to 5 years of hostilities. Well worth celebrating. The death of one man no matter what he was responsible for has nowhere near the same meaning.

Coming back for a moment to say that my comment about being nauseated was about the route this thread was taking, not just BMI. I apologize for my not-very-well-thought-out delivery of that statement. I should have merely unsubscribed.

I don't like it when political debates turn into rash generalizations, buzz words, and name-calling. They always do, however, and it nauseates me.

I am unsubscribing again :), and will stay away from political threads, as I am clearly not cut out for them. Carry on!

Another point. The comparison between the celebrations of the end of WWII and killing OBL are not really valid. The end of WWI was an end to 5 years of hostilities. Well worth celebrating. The death of one man no matter what he was responsible for has nowhere near the same meaning.
__________________



Perhaps not . However for the generation of kids that grew up and has had their youth shaped in large part by images of the towers falling... some seeing their families or friends ,or someone they knew killed on that day... their peers ,if not themselves joining the military to fight the war against jihadist nihilism ;this was the 1st time they had any type of closure moment close to VE VI day,or the fall of the Berlin Wall.

You did notice that it was that generation that erupted in spontaneous celebration . I don't blame them at all. OBL's death doesn't heal that wound... but it moves us closer to that day.

I don't like it when political debates turn into rash generalizations, buzz words, and name-calling. That's the larger majority of the threads on the Current Events forum. Its almost like a blog to air some people's fanatical beliefs.

Perhaps not . However for the generation of kids that grew up and has had their youth shaped in large part by images of the towers falling...some seeing their families or friends ,or someone they knew killed on that day...their peers ,if not themselves joining the military to fight the war against jihadist nihilism ;this was the 1st time they had any type of closure moment close to VE VI day,or the fall of the Berlin Wall.

You did notice that it was that generation that erupted in spontaneous celebration . I don't blame them at all. OBL's death doesn't heal that wound ...but it moves us closer to that day.

I completely agree with this. The war on terror is all I've known from the age of 14 to 23 and on... I vow to do what I could to help so I joined the military. The death of OBL and the happiness that I see from most people reassures me that what I'm doing isn't for not.

Does that mean I threw a party and danced in the street? No, because I realize there is a lot of work to be done and chances are the death of OBL really didn't affect anything.

I am Catholic, and maybe I shouldn't feel happy and celebrate the death of a fellow human being. However, if that human being has caused so much pain and might have continued to cause pain to other human beings then I don't feel happy, but as an American proud of what my country has done and relieved that such an evil being was erased off the Earth, so yeah it is celebration time, COME ON! I am also Peruvian, and in my country proper equal punishment and taking justice into the hands of civilians is exercised, so I don't really feel bad for celebrating a death.

Good Luck,
Javi

If I read your post correctly you advocate the vigilante road

if I read your post correctly you advocate the vigilante roadThat's actually common in central and south America. Corruption and general lack of effective police patrols makes it almost necessary. ( I have Bolivian and Peruvian friends)

It may be effective but it is no different to terrorism.

It may be effective but it is no different to terrorism.
Terrorism is what the bad guys do to the good guys. In Central and South American, it's the other way around, so not terrorism.

It may be effective but it is no different to terrorism.
I wouldn't go quite that far... without that they would have almost no law or justice at all. At least in the more rural areas. Without that the criminal element would have almost free reign.

Not that I know any of this first hand... I know it from what my friends have told me about what they left, and why.

Yes, we know, Pinochet's death squads were essential to the health of the nation. The problem lies in identifying the criminals, so as they say, one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter.

Yes, we know, Pinochet's death squads were essential to the health of the nation. The problem lies in identifying the criminals, so as they say, one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter.

Pinochet was from Chile, but he was a Dictator and his death squads were government thugs.. I don't know anyone from Chile to have commented on that situation from their own perspective. I only know what history and the news has said about it.. I only know people from the more northern countries in South America and most of Central America. ( and a few from a lot farther east and west.)

Terrorism is what the bad guys do to the good guys

Who determines who the good and bad guys are?

Who determines who the good and bad guys are?
I have two lists.

Who determines who the good and bad guys are?Hello BMI:

The ones with the biggest guns.

excon

So ex what you are saying is the bad guys determine who the bad guys are?

Hello C:

Nope. I'm saying that history is written by the victors..

excon

Hello C:

Nope. I'm saying that history is written by the victors..

excon

Well who else is going to write it, the vanquished are often not to be found. Not many books have been written on the subject of we were defeated

I haven't read the entire thread. I got to page 12, and it got so far off track I gave up.

I myself will not celebrate the death of another human being, no matter how evil that human being is. I do wish justice had been served, but I don't believe that murdering him was justice, and yes, it was murder.

I have to point out something that I find amusing. Most of the people that have stated that they won't celebrate the death of a human being, aren't Christian. The majority of those dancing on his grave are Christian. I'm talking about this thread only, not the entire world (before someone debates this).

That's a real eye opener right there.

The death of OBL was poetic justice or perhaps, natural justice, he died the same violent death in fear he offered so many others. No virgins for him!

The world has the right to celebrate the death of a tyrant just as they celebrated the death of other mass murdering tyrants. That he was obviously assassinated makes no difference. If there was more of this form of justice perhaps we would be quickly free of the tyranny of terrorism

The entire world isn't celebrating. That's the point.

Am I sad that he's dead? No. But I'm not going to celebrate the death of another human being. I've been around death far too much in my life to celebrate the death of any living thing.

You say that there should be more assassinations. More forms of this "justice". So, you're saying to abandon all the laws put in place and just go around killing anyone we think is a threat? What if you're wrong? I'm not saying that OBL was innocent, but abandon the law for one man and chaos ensues.

That's a very scary thought.

There will always be evil in the world. Killing off everyone you deem a threat won't put a stop to any of it. In fact, it may just make matters worse. Now they have a cause. Their supposed leader was assassinated. Do you really think they'll just walk away from that?

I don't think that's cause for celebration. It will get worse before it gets better. How can it not?

Now you are carrying the thought too far, I said nothing about abandoning the laws for ordinary people but my view is that those who don't respect the law should not be protected by it. It is my belief that those who step outside the law forfeit its protection.

In WWII deciency and "law" had to be abandoned to bring the Japanese to the point of surrender. The demise of Bin Laden is no different, this has been a war against a hidden cowardly enemy. We are now at the point where things can get better, where former allegiences might be abandoned, and the radical islamic jihad may be preached a little less and ultimately fade away

Perhaps his death will hasten the end of this war against jihadistan. What I don't see is a lot of mourning going on for him from the ummah. That is good news anyway you slice it.

Perhaps his death will hasten the end of this war against jihadistan. What I don't see is alot of mourning going on for him from the ummah. That is good news anyway you slice it.
And we are seeing so many educated Muslim young people rejecting the old authoritarian, theocratic ways.

Yes indeed . I've watched the Libyan thing closely and I see no indication of an embrace of Islamism. They sound like liberty loving people to me .Not sure how all this will pan out ;but I'm hopeful.

Not sure what this means for Iran and their liberty loving people, but the top ayatollah thinks the Mahdi Hatter is "under a spell (http://www.france24.com/en/20110515-irans-ahmadinejad-under-spell-top-cleric#)."

Not sure what this means for Iran and their liberty loving people, but the top ayatollah thinks the Mahdi Hatter is "under a spell (http://www.france24.com/en/20110515-irans-ahmadinejad-under-spell-top-cleric#)."

Gee... its taken them this long to start to grasp Adolf's elevator doesn't go all the way to the top floor?

When the Mahdi-hatter spoke at the UN and saw the glow of the 12th Imam ;and the attendees transfixed not even blinking their eyes ,I knew he had a screw loose.

Back on the Jihadistan front, the Pakistani Taliban vowed to fight on (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110518/ap_on_re_as/as_pakistan)...


"After the martyrdom of Sheik Osama, the mujahideen will continue jihad to complete his mission with a new zeal," Rehman said, referring to his fighters.

"We have the same target, program and mission," he added. "Our enemies are NATO, Jews and Christians."

now you are carrying the thought too far, I said nothing about abandoning the laws for ordinary people but my view is that those who don't respect the law should not be protected by it. It is my belief that those who step outside the law forfeit its protection.

That makes no sense. So, you're saying that everyone that's suspected of murder doesn't have the right to have the law defend him/her? I'm saying innocent until proven guilty. That's the law. If we just go by what people assume, start killing everyone we think is "evil" or "don't respect the law", then my post was accurate. We're abandoning the law.

If we waive the rights of even one person, then that's going to far IMO.

Problem is there is a declared war. Its not simply an action to arrest a criminal to bring to justice like a deadbeat dad or even a bank robber.

That takes it to a whole different level, and according to the international rules of war.. it IS legal to not only target, but to kill the leaders of the enemy... as well as the enemy that is encountered.

Al Qaeda isn't a ring of car thieves, or even human traffickers. They have declared war, and waged attacks to that end.

Otherwise... WWI, WW2, Korea, Vietnam, Desert Storm and in fact every war that was ever waged in history would be considered the very same thing.

That makes no sense. So, you're saying that everyone that's suspected of murder doesn't have the right to have the law defend him/her? I'm saying innocent until proven guilty. That's the law. If we just go by what people assume, start killing everyone we think is "evil" or "don't respect the law", then my post was accurate. We're abandoning the law.

If we waive the rights of even one person, then that's going to far IMO.

No I didn't say you didn't have a right to a defense. The French long ago abandoned the pretense of innocence and so have the Chinese. If there is enough evidence to bring you to trial then it is for you to make the defense not the state's obligation to defend you. But there are people who don't respect the law, the Mafia, the gangs, the drug cartels, terrorists, seriel killers, people trafficers such people have set up their own law and our system allows them the pretense of innocence. Where I come from we have modifed the concept a little, if you are a member of a proscribed organisation you are guilty of an offense.

But there are people who don't respect the law, the Mafia, the gangs, the drug cartels, terrorists, seriel killers, people trafficers such people have set up their own law and our system allows them the pretense of innocence.

You forgot certain presidents, administrations, etc.

The flaw in this line of thinking is the belief that this was a law enforcement event. Smoothy is right... OBL is KIA

The flaw in this line of thinking is the belief that this was a law enforcement event. Smoothy is right ...OBL is KIA

Of course it was a law enforcement event, the original victims were 100% civilian. Only a dingaling like George Bush could think it was a war. There are two different things OBL and Afghanistan, linked but different. The reason it took so long to prosecute OBL is the military were used to do the police work, and for the record OBL was killed in inaction

of course it was a law enforcement event, the original victims were 100% civilian. Only a dingaling like George Bush could think it was a war. There are two different things OBL and Afghanistan, linked but different. The reason it took so long to prosecute OBL is the military were used to do the police work, and for the record OBL was killed in inaction

Any country in the world would consider that an act of war. Besides, they committed other acts of war prior to that. Some of those WERE against the US Military... Some were US Federal Employees. It wasn't one single act or limited to one single day. It was just the one that finally opened the proverbial "can of whoopass."

Personally... If "I" was the president... he would have been dismembered on VIDEO. And then fed to hungry hogs for the world to see, no Muslim funeral at all. But then, I wasn't in the position to do that. That's not talk... that's EXACTLY how I feel about it.

Osama Declared war on the USA, he actually announced it on video and audio recordings... he and his minions committed SEVERAL acts of war against the USA. We were within our rights.

And besides even IF that didn't apply... WE have, believe in and practice capital punishment in this country (and it applies to everyone). Thank god. He was simply shot and killed while resisting arrest if that makes you feel better about it. End of story. There was NO way he was getting out of this alive. No matter HOW it was approached.

Any country in the world would consider that an act of war. Besides, they committed other acts of war prior to that. Some of those WERE against the US Military...Some were US Federal Employees. It wasn't one single act or limited to one single day. It was just the one that finally opened the proverbial "can of whoopass."

Personally....If "I" was the president...he would have been dismembered on VIDEO. And then fed to hungry hogs for the world to see, no Muslim funeral at all. But then, I wasn't in the position to do that. That's not talk....that's EXACTLY how I feel about it.

Osama Declared war on the USA, he actually announced it on video and audio recordings.......he and his minions committed SEVERAL acts of war against the USA. We were within our rights.

And besides even IF that didn't apply....WE have, believe in and practice capital punishment in this country (and it applies to everyone). Thank god. He was simply shot and killed while resisting arrest if that makes you feel better about it. End of story. There was NO way he was getting out of this alive. No matter HOW it was approached.

Look I could declare war, what would it mean? Not much, since I don't possess the resources of a country and an organised military. Al Qaeda was as much an idea as a paramilitary force. They made a didn't in a few places and a hole in New York but really it was a few spectacular events, terrorist acts, and they succeeded because they had the world living in terror for ten years. What was needed to catch them was good sound police work, not thousands of soldiers kicking down doors in the middle of the night.

As far as OBL is concerned, good riddance, he died as he lived, that is justice and so may all of his ilk perish

Look I could declare war, what would it mean? Not much, since I don't possess the resources of a country and an organised military. Al Qaeda was as much an idea as a paramilitary force. They made a dint in a few places and a hole in New York but really it was a few spectacular events, terrorist acts, and they succeeded because they had the world living in terror for ten years. What was needed to catch them was good sound police work, not thousands of soldiers kicking down doors in the middle of the night.

As far as OBL is concerned, good riddance, he died as he lived, that is justice and so may all of his ilk perish
Personally, I think killing as many of the wastes of human flesh that thought like they did as well was appropriate and justified. In fact there are still too many of them still drawing breath to suit me.

Of course I also a big believer in not picking a fight with someone that can kick your butt. Unless you are ready to get it kicked.

Personally, I think killing as many of the wastes of human flesh that thought like they did as well was appropriate and justified. In fact there are still too many of them still drawing breath to suit me.

Of course I also a big believer in not picking a fight with someone that can kick your butt. Unless you are ready to get it kicked.

Usually the only people who do that are religious extremists or fanatics.

It will be interesting to see the outcome in Yemen, that's where al qaeda seems to have boots on the ground at the moment. Interesting how they can only thrive in these backwards places