Bin Laden is dead...

[fc2821]

 


I can't view killing that POS outside the context of what happened on 9/11. http://youtu.be/X_kmfzwc5Pw
I think the celebratory reaction has been genuine and understandable.

I absolutely agree-I think the national celebration of this POS 's death has been long awaited and is much appreciated, there is something to be said for justice.
[/quote]




 

[Mizar]

As a Christian Woman, I could never say, that I was " Happy, that someone was Dead," however, I do feel, that this was about an " Entity of Evil " that had to be stopped, at some point. We did what We had to do.

[Rerun]

My joy goes beyond that he is dead.  He is in HELL!

I don't think he deserved any type of Muslim burail out of "respect".  Give me a break!  We should have put a pair of panties over his head and chucked him in the ocean!

Anyway, I guess I'm glad that both parties are happy and agreeable for once.  It is so nice.  Even Fox News is praising Obama.  We better have backup video of that.

[okarol]

Got this off facebook - what a slip!!
http://youtu.be/mMP7Ys57ha4

[YLGuy]

Sure, it had to be a FOX station! Too much! 

[Rerun]

I've heard several people say Obama when they mean Usama. 


         

[kristina]

In a radio-broadcast in which politicians were saying how good it was
that Bin Laden had finally been killed
for masterminding so many major atrocities across the world,
a policemen phoned in to the program and asked the politicians
what evidence existed to proof the man called “Bin Laden” masterminded these atrocities ?

All the politicians could say was that Bin Laden had admitted to the crimes.

Apart from that there is no other evidence.

The policeman said that in a normal court of law
someone admitting to a crime would not be enough evidence for a conviction.
There has to be more supportive evidence.
But no such supportive evidence exists in this case.

The policeman said it was odd that Bin Laden was killed
because now there would be no way to find out from Bin Laden
the important facts which would be supportive to the crimes
he is alleged to have committed.

Has anyone got an opinion about this policeman saying
that we should not shoot someone just because they say “I did it” ?

What do you think?

[Chris]

I would say he might not be a Chicago cop then.
 
On a serious note though, he has a valid point, but I also do not know all the evidence, tapes, or his collegues have said while being detained. So just going by what has been on TV, what evidence has been printed in papers, as of now killing him was a good thing. Like diapers, opinions can be changed.

[Bill Peckham]

In a radio-broadcast in which politicians were saying how good it was
that Bin Laden had finally been killed
for masterminding so many major atrocities across the world,
a policemen phoned in to the program and asked the politicians
what evidence existed to proof the man called “Bin Laden” masterminded these atrocities ?

All the politicians could say was that Bin Laden had admitted to the crimes.

Apart from that there is no other evidence.

The policeman said that in a normal court of law
someone admitting to a crime would not be enough evidence for a conviction.
There has to be more supportive evidence.
But no such supportive evidence exists in this case.

The policeman said it was odd that Bin Laden was killed
because now there would be no way to find out from Bin Laden
the important facts which would be supportive to the crimes
he is alleged to have committed.

Has anyone got an opinion about this policeman saying
that we should not shoot someone just because they say “I did it” ?

What do you think?

Are you questioning the evidence that Al-Qaeda is responsible for 9/11 or are you questioning the contention the OBL led AQ?

[Chris]

I thought she was referring to Osama Bin Laden Bill.

[Bill Peckham]

I thought she was referring to Osama Bin Laden Bill.

OBL (Osama Bin Laden) led AQ (Al-Qaeda) and since AQ was responsible for 9/11, OBL is as guilty as he himself said he was.


I'm wondering which part of that is being questioned.

[Chris]

Sometimes we need reminding of facts as they do in court because over time people forget and go wit what they feel.
 
But going back to the policceman, he maybe wanted to see him on trial and thinking how things are done normally, not by terrorist. This is out of my norm for being serious, so I'm stepping away. Overtime when more information is declassified, we will learn more.

[Bill Peckham]

Sometimes we need reminding of facts as they do in court because over time people forget and go wit what they feel.
 
But going back to the policceman, he maybe wanted to see him on trial and thinking how things are done normally, not by terrorist. This is out of my norm for being serious, so I'm stepping away. Overtime when more information is declassified, we will learn more.

I assume the policeman knows that there have been four trials and convictions of 9/11 coconspirators, so it has been established in a court of law that AQ is a criminal conspiracy, it was proven in a court of law that AQ has organized, financed and executed multiple attacks on the US. So what evidence is there that OBL "masterminded" 911? That sounds like OBL was accused of having been the individual who thought up and planned 9/11. The policeman should know that OBL stood accused of leading the organization that thought up and planned 9/11, so unless the policeman is just a contrarian with a couple beers in him he must be asking for evidence that  OBL was the leader of AQ and I have never heard anyone question that, I didn't know it was being questioned.

[kristina]

Thank you for your replies to this, Chris and Bill.
It would seem because of the serious nature of these atrocities
we will have to wait, perhaps for many years,
for the facts to be made public, so we can appreciate
the involvement of Bin Laden in these plots.

I only mentioned this policeman’s phone call to the radio station
because I rarely read the newspapers now and I have no television,
so I thought I may have missed important elements in this story
and the policeman’s comments put to the politicians
made me extremely curious.

[Rerun]

On television they spell his name Usama........  Just a side note.

           

OK.... same topic just further question....  Do you think they should show his dead picture.

IMO no.... I don't need to see someone's face blown off.  I could not recognize him.  But, I do think congress needs to see it.

[fc2821]

I agree with Rerun. Two reasons:

   #1.) It would just "amo" for morons here and abroad to use for hateful purposes. Certain factions in certain places will use it to inflame certain illiterate or ignorant groups.

     #2.) I've seem dead people, they ain't pretty but that doesn't both me. I just don't need to see it.  Hell, he's dead, he's fish food, we need to move on.

       

[kristina]

Points taken. What purpose does an unidentifyable body serve ?
This is not evidence, it could be anyone.

Gloating over any death is surely wrong, and in this case,
if the death is true, it might incite further hatred and atrocities
if the death is celebrated.

Mind you, there is no shortage of aggression
and the tension and general fear is very noticeable.

It would be interesting to know
who fuels the aggression in people
so they commit such horrific atrocities ?

And what are their reasons for doing this ?

It is also interesting why the general public
wish to quickly believe the people who lead them,
without questioning their actions and motives ?

[Zach]

It is also interesting why the general public
wish to quickly believe the people who lead them,
without questioning their actions and motives ?

That's why we have the Fourth Estate.

[Bill Peckham]

It is also interesting why the general public
wish to quickly believe the people who lead them,
without questioning their actions and motives ?

That's why we have the Fourth Estate.

 

Truth can be discovered and verified when it has to do with actual events, happening or not happening. But we will never know "motives". It doesn't matter how much time passes. 400 years later Hamlet's motives are open to debate even as we know some of his inner dialog.

All that said whose motives in this instance are not being understood? The Pakistani?

[kristina]

It is also interesting why the general public
wish to quickly believe the people who lead them,
without questioning their actions and motives ?

That's why we have the Fourth Estate.

Zach, do you know what a "D-notice" is
and the wider ramifications of such notices ?
Unfortunately it makes the Fourth Estate null and void...

[Zach]

Zach, do you know what a "D-notice" is
and the wider ramifications of such notices ?
Unfortunately it makes the Fourth Estate null and void...

That might be true for State run press.

The truth, however, eventually comes out.

[kristina]

Thanks, Bill and Zach,

here are a couple of examples of earlier political conundrums :

Queen Elizabeth I is portrayed as a fearsome Queen
of whom everyone was afraid
because she was so clever and so domineering.

Do you believe that?

We have to bring into the frame the man who really pulled the strings,
her closest adviser, William Cecil, 1st Baron Burghley.

He was head of the Secret Service.
 
He held the power over very complex secret Departments,
and these Departments had a network of spies
and they employed forgers
who very accurately forged letters and documents.

But for whose benefit, Queen Elizabeth I or William Cecil and/or others ?

One of these forged documents was most probably responsible
for the Queen’s accusations against Mary Queen of Scots
which led to Mary’s execution.

What is going on behind these closed doors ?
Who are the people who mastermind events ?

Unless we keep a totally open mind we will have no chance...

William III was a puppet of an organization which also had
one of the greatest networks of spies of the time
which engineered a plan for William III to become King of England.

For what purpose and what were their motives ?

So much time has gone by
and we still have no idea of the motives
behind the actions of these people.

It is too complex and too well hidden
for any Journalist to find out the truth.

Unfortunately there are no answers
and unless we keep a totally open mind we will have no chance...

[Bill Peckham]

I'm having trouble seeing the relevance of palace intrigue in the 1500s to the modern media environment.

[kristina]

Bill, I am just pointing out how difficult it is
to ever establish
a motive for the machinations of governments,
whether it is the 16th or 17th century or today.

[Willis]

My momma always taught me that if I couldn't say something good about someone then to not say anything at all.

So...Osama Bin Laden's dead. Good.