Author Topic: A new controversial topic.  (Read 8538 times)

technomc

  • WordStar
  • ****
  • Posts: 8513
  • Dorset UK
    • View Profile
A new controversial topic.
« on: May 03, 2011, 07:51:02 PM »
Now the wedding is over and the ex-pope's beatification has started let's start a new topic of controversy....

Osama Bin Laden...

Why did they get rid of the body so quickly and why at sea..??

Good thing or will his death cause more chaos and mayhem?

What happened to his wife, who he was cowering behind apparently??

Why no pictures of his dead body?

Why the need for DNA testing?

If they can do that to him, why can't they do it Gadaffi too??

Good riddance i say....

Over to you..........................

Over to you....

Hobbit

  • Eulexic
  • ***
  • Posts: 2135
  • Bletchley, Buckinghamshire, England
    • View Profile
Re: A new controversial topic.
« Reply #1 on: May 03, 2011, 08:33:07 PM »
Hi Tech
Don't know a great deal about it but I think he was buried quickly because his religion dictates that he has to be buried within 24 hours.  I  also heard that he was buried at sea so that his followers wouldn't have anywhere to gather.  I gleaned all this from the BBC news. I agree with you completely.  I have a nasty suspicion that there is already somebody ready to step into his shoes.  I also think that there's probably a lot more to it all than we as Joe Public will ever know!

pat

  • Eulexic
  • ***
  • Posts: 2924
  • Rugby, England.
    • View Profile
Re: A new controversial topic.
« Reply #2 on: May 03, 2011, 08:43:07 PM »
Without a doubt the world is a better place without Bin Laden in it, but I must admit I found the jubilation at his murder quite unsettling (and no, I'm not a bleeding heart do-gooder! Far from it).

Like you, Hobbit, I think there's a great deal that the public isn't being told, although no doubt it will leak out over the coming months. I wonder how long it will be before Donald Trump claims that it wasn't Bin Laden who was killed at all and that Obama claimed it was simply for the kudos.

But now that the president has murdered Osama Bin Laden, is he now Obama Sin Laden?

mkenuk

  • Eulexic
  • ***
  • Posts: 2118
  • Life? Don't talk to me about life.
    • View Profile
Re: A new controversial topic.
« Reply #3 on: May 03, 2011, 08:58:42 PM »
Heavy!
A great many topics / cans of worms opened there, Ilandrah.  My one hope is that the events of the last couple of days do not lead to a rash of appalling, jingoistic films / TV movies  showing how the spirit of John Wayne lives on and once again Hollywood has made the world safe for Freedom and Democracy etc etc ad infinitum. The fact remains that they should have got him ten years ago. How the hell he was allowed to escape from those  caves is a question that does need to be answered.
No doubt other maniacs will arise to fill the void. They always do.
My suggested answers to a couple of your points: burial at sea was to ensure that his grave did not become a place of pilgrimage for militants. Look at the morons who celebrate Hitler's birthday every year. The sooner the memory of bin Laden fades the better. It's normal Muslim practice to dispose of a dead body within 24 hours of death, so it had to be done quickly. Why the DNA tests? To ensure that in the future there can be no hint of conspiracy theories, cover-ups, 'they got the wrong man' scenarios etc
It will be interesting though to hear what other people think.
MK


biggerbirdbrain

  • WordStar
  • ****
  • Posts: 8738
  • Texas
    • View Profile
Re: A new controversial topic.
« Reply #4 on: May 03, 2011, 10:30:19 PM »
Good riddance!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And a HUUUUUUUUUUUGE round of applause to those awesome Navy Seals!! They're the real heroes here.

Oh, and just in case there's anyone who doesn't believe it really happened probably still thinks the earth is flat, that no one ever went to the moon, and that Hitler is still alive somewhere in South America!

Alonzo Quixote

  • Paronomaniac
  • ******
  • Posts: 397
  • Greenlawn, NY, USA
    • View Profile
Re: A new controversial topic.
« Reply #5 on: May 04, 2011, 03:37:19 AM »
The government of the USA, my government, is now mulling over whether they should release photographs of bin Laden after he was no longer alive. 

I remember that photographs of Saddam Hussein's sons were released after they were no longer alive.  If memory serves, I believe viewing of these photographs caused feelings to flame.  I don't remember if there were any reprisals.

My suggestion is that photographs of bin Laden NOT be released now.  Maybe, in a long time from now.
I think now they would cause feelings to flame.  There has been a lot of talk in US media whether there will be a backlash.  A backlash has already been threatened.

I understand that there is positive DNA evidence that supports authentication of bin Laden's identity.

Our media has compared this to the elimination of Stalin and Hitler.  I don't know how many people bin Laden can be said to have killed (surely in the thousands or possibly tens of thousands).  I don't know how his numbers would compare to those of Stalin and Hitler.  I wouldn't be surprised if someone does some research and comes up with approximate numbers.

I don't agree that President Obama murdered bin Laden.  Our previous president, George W. Bush stated immediately after 9/11 that bin Laden was "wanted dead or alive".  President Obama telephoned George W. Bush on Sunday evening to apprise him of what was happening.  I believe it is a matter of justice being served for bin Laden's actions.


TRex

  • Glossologian
  • **
  • Posts: 1659
  • ~50 miles from Chicago, in the Corn (maize) Belt
    • View Profile
Re: A new controversial topic.
« Reply #6 on: May 04, 2011, 10:57:03 AM »
Without a doubt the world is a better place without Bin Laden in it, but I must admit I found the jubilation at his murder quite unsettling (and no, I'm not a bleeding heart do-gooder! Far from it).

Thank you! I was also greatly bothered by the celebrations and cheers. No doubt he was a bad guy, but it seems wrong to celebrate anyone's death.

Our media has compared this to the elimination of Stalin and Hitler.  I don't know how many people bin Laden can be said to have killed (surely in the thousands or possibly tens of thousands).  I don't know how his numbers would compare to those of Stalin and Hitler.  I wouldn't be surprised if someone does some research and comes up with approximate numbers.

I don't think bin Laden's killings come anywhere near the numbers killed by Hitler or Stalin ... or Mao, or Pol Pot, or Amin, or a whole bunch of others. (Which isn't to say he was an okay guy! He wasn't!)


ilandrah

  • Word-meister
  • ****
  • Posts: 178
  • News South Wales, Australia
    • View Profile
    • Denizens of Ethos
Re: A new controversial topic.
« Reply #7 on: May 04, 2011, 12:05:57 PM »
mkenuk, I haven't spoken yet. LOL

I agree with many others here that the wild celebrations of this mans death left me feeling uncomfortable. I understand many have cause to despise him, but these ecstatic scenes are distasteful IMO. It does hearten me to see so many here feel the same way.

Personally, I would have liked to have seen Bin Laden taken to trial and had his crimes revealed in full to the public, his full involvement in any terror attacks proven. Once proven guilty he should then have been jailed.
It is harder to idolise a living figure, particuarly if that figure is seen to be saving himself rather than facing the full repercussions of his crimes.
Sure there would be problems with this, but I still like to believe in the rule of law, and would have liked to have thought that we could take the high ground on this one.

There is already further controversy about the treatment of his body. Burial at sea is only used in certain instances within the muslim faith and many argue that it was not warranted in this instance. Burial at an unknown location would also have prevented pilgrimages. A know site could have been used to gether intelligence too, we would know who his followers were to a greater degree.

The sudden concern for following custom with the body is something else that seems odd for a lot of people. Many argue he didn't deserve to be shown respect in any way. Saddams sons were not treated in accordance with their faith either.

As to the photos, I think at this point any one who doesn't believe what Obama has stated are not going to be convinced by any pictures. So that would achieve very little except perhaps give other extremists (on both sides) something to gloat over and use to spur others to follow them.

One can hardly be surprised by the conspiracy theories. Wikileaks has shown how often our governments lie to us, Bin Laden was shot in the face, buried at sea within hours and so we have only what the government tellls us in relation to this matter. DNA tests could easily be manipulated or totally faked. There would be no way that any one could ever prove that this is all a flasehood.

I don't know how much confusion about what occurred has been officials getting details wrong, or the media jumping to conclusions and then redacting their stories, but there have already been several different versions reported about what actually happened. This can only cause the conspiracies to mount further.
Just this morning they state that the woman shot in the same room launched herself at security forces, after it was previously said that Bin Laden used her as a human shield and she was shot dead. Now they say she was wounded in the leg and survived.
It was also reported today that Bin Laden was unarmed, previous reports had him weilding and AK-47.

Perhaps the truth will sift out over the coming weeks, but those who don't want to believe that he is dead will have plenty of fodder to argue against the official story.

Reprisal attacks are more of a concern. Wikileaks has a document with a guantanamo detainee saying that Al Qaeda will launch a nuclear attack somewhere in Europe if Bin Laden is captured or killed. Hopefully that one is an outright lie from the detainee.

pat

  • Eulexic
  • ***
  • Posts: 2924
  • Rugby, England.
    • View Profile
Re: A new controversial topic.
« Reply #8 on: May 04, 2011, 05:50:51 PM »


I don't agree that President Obama murdered bin Laden.  Our previous president, George W. Bush stated immediately after 9/11 that bin Laden was "wanted dead or alive".  President Obama telephoned George W. Bush on Sunday evening to apprise him of what was happening.  I believe it is a matter of justice being served for bin Laden's actions.



An interesting take on justice, AQ. In this country it involves a court of law with a judge and jury. Even the Nazi war criminals were afforded trials and, as has been pointed out, some of their crimes were far more heinous than those of Bin Laden.

technomc

  • WordStar
  • ****
  • Posts: 8513
  • Dorset UK
    • View Profile
Re: A new controversial topic.
« Reply #9 on: May 04, 2011, 10:21:12 PM »
I find the talk of his 'death' rather uncomfortable...i wish they would just say after his 'killing', 'assassination',  or 'murder'..which is closer to the truth. His 'death' makes it sound accidental rather than 'cold blooded'.

Either way i am glad he is gone and wish the media would just shut up about it now. Put it to bed..and leave it alone.
Why anyone would want to see a picture or watch a video of the deed is quite beyond me. The blood stained carpet was bad enough bearing in mind it was the real thing and not movie stuff.

Lots of interesting thoughts though...we are a diverse bunch...


Linda

  • WordStar
  • ****
  • Posts: 6726
  • Cumbria, England
    • View Profile
Re: A new controversial topic.
« Reply #10 on: May 04, 2011, 10:27:01 PM »

Quote
I find the talk of his 'death' rather uncomfortable...i wish they would just say after his 'killing', 'assassination',  or 'murder'..which is closer to the truth. His 'death' makes it sound accidental rather than 'cold blooded'.

I totally agree, mate. 

birdy

  • Eulexic
  • ***
  • Posts: 3283
  • Brooklyn, NY
    • View Profile
Re: A new controversial topic.
« Reply #11 on: May 05, 2011, 01:16:25 PM »
I can't say I rejoiced at the news of his death, but I'm not shedding tears either.  I think my feelings are more "quiet satisfaction."  I believe any formal trial would have become a circus.  He admitted his involvement in the WTC attacks, and I doubt there would have been any question about the death sentence.

From what I've heard on the news, President Obama has decided against publishing the photos of the body - and I'm glad of that for a number of reasons.  Aside from the obvious avoidance of inflaming his followers, I don't believe there is any purpose in displaying a dead body to satisfy the voyeurism of those who enjoy such things.  From what I heard, most New Yorkers agree with me.  I heard that authorities had checked with Muslims to find out how a body should be handled, in an effort to avoid causing any additional  hard feelings.  I can understand why they didn't want any formal funeral or tomb to avoid a rallying point.

But I'm sure more information will be coming out in the media.  With no royal wedding to focus on, they need some news to catch our attention.

ilandrah

  • Word-meister
  • ****
  • Posts: 178
  • News South Wales, Australia
    • View Profile
    • Denizens of Ethos
Re: A new controversial topic.
« Reply #12 on: May 07, 2011, 03:40:39 PM »
I don't think having a grave would have made much of a difference. Without it people are massing at the place where he was killed.

Apart from the fundamental ideal of justice, I still think that he should have been formally charged and seen a trial -- Regardless of whether or not he confessed to the 9/11 attacks, he surely had information that would have been very useful in prosecuting other terrorists and isolating their activities further. We will never know who else he could have implicated.

mkenuk

  • Eulexic
  • ***
  • Posts: 2118
  • Life? Don't talk to me about life.
    • View Profile
Re: A new controversial topic.
« Reply #13 on: May 07, 2011, 06:21:08 PM »
First of all, my apologies to Ilandrah for wrongly identifying him as the founder of this thread.
 Now that we have had some time to reflect on the end of Osama bin Laden, a few things are starting to become clear. Firstly, nobody is really sorry to see him gone: he was a maniac, a zealot whose ambition was to bring about a world war between Muslims and non-Muslims. His goal was a Muslim Empire stretching from North Africa to Indonesia with himself at the head of it. This empire's wealth would come from the middle east's oil reserves.
What is disturbing many people now is the manner of his death: an extrajudicial execution/assassination redolent of the state-sponsored terrorism so often condemned by the United States. No doubt the man was guilty of horrific crimes, but he was never brought to trial to answer those charges. Probably such a trial, had it been allowed to take place would have become a circus. The Saddam Hussein trial a few years ago was at times a farce, and the attempts by the world community to bring alleged war criminals such as Slobodan Milosevic and Radasvan Karadic (pardon spelling errors) to justice show how difficult these things can be. Would Osama, had he been captured alive, have faced a civilian or a military court? If the former, would the authorities have ever been able to compile a neutral, objective jury? Unlikely. We shall never know.
The international lawyers will argue about all of this in the coming years. One thing is sure: many, many books are going to be written about the death of Osama bin Laden.
One final point: just who gave George Bush the right to demand the capture 'dead or alive' of Osama bin Laden?
MK

rogue_mother

  • Glossologian
  • **
  • Posts: 1562
  • I CAN'T BREATHE!
    • View Profile
Re: A new controversial topic.
« Reply #14 on: May 08, 2011, 12:08:00 AM »
One final point: just who gave George Bush the right to demand the capture 'dead or alive' of Osama bin Laden?
MK

I would say that bin Laden gave Bush that right, once it had become clear that bin Laden had declared war on the people of the United States and directed the actions that resulted in massive loss of life and property on American soil. If bin Laden had been the head of a country, the United States Congress would almost certainly have declared war on that country, and quite frankly, I don't think many outside of the Arab world would have disagreed with that. As a private person acting outside of any state-related jurisdictions, bin Laden did not have and should not have the same legal protections being granted to Milosevic and Karadzic by the 'world community'. Americans have disagreed a great deal on the extent of the wars being waged in Iraq and Afghanistan, but quite frankly, very few disagreed with Bush's demand for the capture of bin Laden 'dead or alive'.
Inside the Beltway, Washington, DC metropolitan area