Yes, it is a cold blooded murder by a most powerfull state of the world. The action was uncivilised. The action was violation of UN charter. It was violation of soveriegnty of a state. So it is proved that US does care any rules of civilised world to achieve its goal right or wrong. But again this country preaches democracy, human rights, honour globally. US has lost its credibility as a decent humane state. It is now a strongest power on earth without any sense or responsibility.

The rule of law has become a joke to mess with the masses, nothing else. Osma Ben Ladan was shot according to the story, once in the chest and once in the head, I suppose he died from his wounds?  So no chance for enhanced interpretations, ...Oh wait I see copious amounts of enhanced interpretations. 

Our country seems to be in a shit pot right now, unemployment is said to be 9 percent, I feel it is more like 19 percent. Womens rights are being taken from them, Unions are being busted, oil companies are making massive profits on the worlds natural resources, voting rights are being fiddled with, the Republicans want to give Medicare to the insurance companies, the Republicans want to give Social Security to Wall Street. Homeland security reeks of Nazi Germany in name and structure. People are losing their homes to the banksters caused by greed and unaccountability.  And you guys are worried about some sick sack of shit who died after being responsible for the deaths of thousands of people?

It cost me a 145 dollars to fill up my Humvee the other day,
my kids have moved back home, my wife ran off with the bible sales man, my propane bill was 400 dollars, food is going up and I can’t afford to take my kilts to the dry cleaners.

Well I do not have Osma ben Laden to worry about anymore, makes me feel good about America and our service people, since I paid taxes this year while that twit Osama ben Laden was haveing a porn fest at my expense paying for the military to chase his ass all over Iraq and Afghanistan and he was hiding in Pakistan all the time?

I do not know about you, but it would be nice if someone like the oil companies and GE helped pay for some of the bills. The game of ” Where in the world was Osama ben Laden” seems a bit over priced to me.

What is really bad, the price of Tequila has gone up, when is all this going to stop?

There is something particularly disturbing about
America’s new found self-righteousness when it comes
to killing others.

Firstly, there is something morally weak about
killing a defenseless man (we assume bin Laden was
asleep) and we now know that he was unarmed.

But more than that. America seems to have developed
and masterminded the ultimate way of killing its
enemies sometimes often without ever seeing, naming
and identifying that enemy.

Long gone are the days when soldiers faced each other
on the battle field. Since WW1 the west has gradually
moved to a form of long distance combat. Today,
American don’t even need to travel to another country
to kill, they can sit in a control room and press
remote control unmanned drones. That is the most
unethical part of it: unmanned… ie machines being
sent to kill.

The psychology behind this dehumanizes people. 
There’s a famous writer whose name I forget, who
recently wrote about ‘seeing’ war and death that acts
like a moral corrective. When we see dead bodies, we
are reminded of our mortality, of our conscientiousness and of our souls.

The killing of bin Laden was not done by remote
control, but was done by people who are trained to
kill. America must be careful not to become too
sanctimonious and removed from the rest of the human
race.

Memory_Hole,
“The Nazis crime was invading countries without provocation. Wars of self-defense are legal under the UN Charter.”

That’s not true.  There’s no such thing as a war of self-defence.  You can’t START a war to defend yourself.  A war is the thing which you’d be defending yourself against.  If you start a war then by definition you are the attacker.

The wording of the law doesn’t use these crappy and vague terms.  It simply says that the use of force is forbidden except in response to an on-going attack.  “on-going” meaning that it already happened and continues to happen.

Therefore, all wars are illegal.

Only in America is argument by idiocy apparently seen as valid:

rancone
“it stretches my credibility that there can be international trials for war crimes if war is not formally recognized by international law.”

So you are entirely clueless about the facts but that just proves your case? the more dumb you are the more right you are?  Did it ever cross your mind that the facts are out there available to anyone not too lazy to Google them?  Did it ever cross your mind to educate yourself before making dogmatic assertions based on your total ignorance?

Hey guess what?  You’re WRONG.  Funny eh?

War is recognized—its recognized as a crime.

But enough with the fact-based expository prose. Having witnessed this same murderous madness decades ago in Southeast Asia, I have no trouble at all putting on the other person’s sandals and walking a few kilometers in them (metaphorically speaking) in verse, as well. Hence:

“Thanks a Lot!” 

Benevolent invader of my land
How can I thank you for the helping hand?
Why, had you not come here with awe and shock,
Reducing my poor home to piles of rock,
I might have raised my children safe and sound,
But, thanks to you, I’ve laid them in the ground.

A wife I had, once too, but now no more.
She died one day while driving to the store.
Some nervous mercenaries that you hired
Screamed something at her once, then aimed and fired.
The bullet-riddled windshield told the tale:
That “freed” of life, our women need no veil.

Your generals have come so many times,
Yet never have to answer for their crimes.
Instead, promotion weighs them down with stars
But never, like enlisted men, the scars
Resulting from the bungling and sheer waste
Of thinking last but shooting first in haste.
 
On nine-eleven, two-thousand-and-one
You got a taste of what you’ve often done
To countries that had never caused you harm
Yet still, too late, you sounded the alarm
And whipped yourself into a lather thick
So you could hurt yourself with your own stick.

Three thousand on that fateful day you lost.
Six thousand more you’ve added to the cost
Since then, which only proves that there or here
You act the same: in folly, rage, and fear.
In time, you’ll go back home to where you’re from,
To fight among yourselves, the deaf and dumb.
 
Too bad for all the carnage that you’ve caused
Who never thought or for a minute paused
Before afflicting us with your disease:
A plague of bankrupt bullies, fascist fleas,
Who, both hands outward stretched to beg a loan,
Continue “helping” us to shrink and groan.
 
You talk to pat yourselves upon the back.
Your actions only scream of what you lack:
The insight and intelligence to see
How much you’ve harmed yourself as well as me.
But just the same I’ll thank you to go home
Before you earn the fate that toppled Rome.

Michael Murry, “The Misfortune Teller,” Copyright 2010

Unfortunately for Americans at home and abroad, their Presidents have enthusiastically established and confirmed international precedent for the indefinite incarceration without charge or trial and/or extra-judicial assassination of any persons (or members of their families) that any regime wants to summarily eliminate for any reason—or none at all—anywhere in the world. What American Presidents have done to others, others may do to the American people and their Presidents with equal panache. Anarchy and chaos will now happily reign thanks in great part to the “exceptional” lawlessness of American Presidents, the current one even more so than his predecessors.

“Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” So we have, and so they will (and, in fact, did on 9/11/2001).

could be nobody was ‘murdered’, though most certainly some died…

Chinese media reported this almost verbatim the day after the ‘event’ - and yes,
it’s ‘unconfirmed’ in this report, but then what of the ‘official’ report is
‘confirmed’ beyond ‘official’ regime releases?

Unconfirmed: Bin Laden Mission Aborted, American Deaths from Helicopter
Crash

“EYEWITNESS” INTERVIEW SAYS AMERICANS DIED, MISSION UNSUCCESSFUL

“We saw the helicopter burning, we saw the dead bodies, then everything was
removed and now there is nothing”

By Gordon Duff, Senior Editor Veterans Today

“A Pakistan news agency reports that the bin Laden raid on Abbottabad was
aborted because of a helicopter crash which killed several passengers, believed
to be Pashtu speaking Americans.

Though this is from a news agency, it is an eyewitness account and
unconfirmed.  Veterans Today has received this story from several sources but
most recently from our comments section.  Thanks!

If this story is true, it would be a disaster for the Obama presidency, deeply
paralleling the unsuccessful hostage rescue attempt in Iran during the Carter
presidency.”

http://tinyurl.com/3fzwrv8

this event is like every other aspect of the phony GWOT - left/lib progressives cite thousands of regime lies, but when it comes to the big ones (9/11 and everything that ‘proves’ the terrorists’ intent) they buy right in, call it all ‘blowback’ and frame it all in nonsensical ‘political correctitude’ - it’s all our fault for being addicted to oil - now go get counseling and a hybrid before the planet burns in hell - and be sure to vote for Obomber again, or you’ll get someone worse - hallelujah!

DavidByron,

“Good news for you then.  All war *is* illegal under the UN Charter (and also various other lesser and older treaties such as the Kellog-Briand pact—- what exactly do you think the Nazis were convicted *of* at Nuremberg?)”

The Nazis crime was invading countries without provocation. Wars of self-defense are legal under the UN Charter.  Unfortunately the US war in Afghanistan is not self defense, nor is the one in Iraq.

Unfortunately, to the war criminals who run the US foreign policy, including most of Congress, the imperatives of the UN Charter are irrelevant, as is the US Constitution. 

“However not *all* killing in a war is wrong because not all killing is by the people who started the war (the criminals that is).  But if the US is in a war?  You can bet they started it.”

Yes, for sure they started it, just as they always do, and then lie about it. And the corporate media accepts their lies as truth.

By DavidByron, May 17 at 10:56 am
“Acts of war are not permitted under any international law.  Again: duh.”
By Memory_Hole, May 17 at 9:43 am Link to this comment

J Purrington:
I’m no expert in int’l law but I don’t believe “All Killing in war is murder” from the standpoint of international law. If that were true, war itself would be illegal, which would be a wonderful idea.

I agree it would be wonderful if “Acts of war are not permitted under any international law.” but it stretches my credibility that there can be international trials for war crimes if war is not formally recognized by international law.
Unfortunately the activities, the war, against OBL has been prosecuted as a war, and recognized as such by the international bodies, for ten years.
That perhaps now the page can be turned, the ‘wars’ ended and a return to some sort of normalcy (no war unless directly, specifically and imminently threatened by another nation/state and in the US as authorized by a vote of Congress).
We are currently in a very bad state but we are in this state and have been for a decade. Time to end all this. For better or worse the killing of OBL hopefully brings the end of this sorry state of affairs closer to an ending.

Memory_Hole:
“I’m no expert in int’l law but I don’t believe “All Killing in war is murder” from the standpoint of international law. If that were true, war itself would be illegal, which would be a wonderful idea.”

Good news for you then.  All war *is* illegal under the UN Charter (and also various other lesser and older treaties such as the Kellog-Briand pact—- what exactly do you think the Nazis were convicted *of* at Nuremberg?)

Since every country in the world is a UN Charter member (except the Vatican) this means all domestic law in all 192 countries make war illegal too.

Read it for yourself the charter is not long and more important than your US constitution.

However not *all* killing in a war is wrong because not all killing is by the people who started the war (the criminals that is).  But if the US is in a war?  You can bet they started it.

The usual jingoistic American lies to justify their killings.

quote:
“The answer, unfortunately, is that there is no easy answer—at least not yet. The legality of the killing depends not only on the facts as they unfolded at bin Laden’s compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, but also on what body of law, domestic or international, is used to analyze the facts.”

Actually Americans, you don’t get to choose what international law is because like most laws, its written down.

You can’t use force against another country.  PERIOD.

This action was criminal.  PERIOD.

Deaths as a result of it are murder.  PERIOD.

There is no claim of self-defence when you are the initiator of the violence and when you are carrying out a violent criminal act especially one that will obviously cause a violent reaction.  You dont get to start a fight and then claim self-defence.  DUH.

quote:
“And in any event, defenders of the deed have reminded us, the killing of bin Laden was not a domestic law enforcement operation but an act of war clearly permissible under the norms of international law.”

Acts of war are not permitted under any international law.  Again: duh.

J Purrington:

I’m no expert in int’l law but I don’t believe “All Killing in war is murder” from the standpoint of international law. If that were true, war itself would be illegal, which would be a wonderful idea.

As to targeting generals in war, yes, that happens.  However, the US Congress has not formally declared war on Al Qaeda, has it? So we are not even legally at war. Secondly, the case against Bin Laden rests entirely on his alleged involvement in 9/11, as the supposed “mastermind” of that heinous crime.  But even the FBI has admitted that the reason his Wanted poster does not list 9/11 is because “there is no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.” 

So then the question becomes, is it okay for a US president to assassinate someone he designates guilty of terrorism, in an undeclared war, without providing any evidence of the man’s guilt?

I don’t see how that can be “ok” from any ethical or moral standpoint.  The Founders would not have given that power to a President alone—indeed, they would be horrified by Obama’s blithe speech about the murder on 60 Minutes recently. 

You say:  “It was obvious that bin Laden was planning future terrorist acts against the United States.  His command post there in Pakistan was a legitimate target, and he also was a legitimate target.”

How was that “obvious”? What evidence do you have for that? or do you just believe whatever the government tells you?

“After a War is over, war crimes are tried based upon the violations of the Geneva rules of those still alive who violated the rules and that includes torture.  Bush and Cheney should be worried about that.”

Bush and Cheney have nothing to worry about, because the US is totally lawless when it comes to its rulers. If there is one thing that has been made perfectly clear in the last 10 years it is that presidents are above the law in the US.  They can invade sovereign nations without provocation, authorize torture, targeted assassinations, conduct warrantless spying on millions of people, and they will be given a pass by the corporate media and half the population or more.  They SHOULD have something to worry about, and so SHOULD Obama, who is our latest war-criminal-in-chief.  But they don’t.

npabga, May 16 at 9:32 am:

And wouldn’t sovereignty be considered an issue if, instead, some other country would pull off a similar kind of mission on US territory?

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Letelier_case

Yes, it is a murder. Truth is a 5 letter word. It says,million words. To understand what is murder and what is not murder you do not need a seminar paper. US has killed Che Guevara,a militant marxist fighting imperialism 40 years.The dead body was not shown to the people. After 40 years they have killed an Islamist militant leader Osama Bin Laden,once a friend of US on the same ground.They have not shown the dead body of Osama. Nobody on earth has the right to kill a person without trial or justice.

Wrong question indeed!  Let me make it simple for all you would be investigative journalists and truthdiggers.  The real story that needs to be told is why was Obama’s Sunday night “big lie” so radically different from what actually happened?

By willymack, May 16 at 1:03 pm

“But was it murder?”
Wrong question. The article should read:
“But was it REAL”?
OBL has been used as a propoganda tool for about a decade, and his “demise”  ... should end this a a propaganda tool.
At least we can hope for some good.

One day Americans will learn that not all the rationalizing in the world, if purely US-centric as this is, will count for a hill of beans in the view of the international community. The US can no longer be counted as a nation governed by laws. The single act of refusing to comply with International Law, and holding its agents as above that law, is regarded by the greater majority of the World as a de facto confession of contravention.

It does not matter what US law procedure used to argue under—it is all rendered inadmissable. As for the culpability to the act of murder of the President and his hit team in the present situation no amount of misinterpretation of International Law and the Geneva Conventions will produce a just and legal verdict. Such can only be gained as the result of due process by an Internationally constituted court of law, such as the ICC at The Hague.

Actually it was treason.  Once Obama delivered the Sunday night “big lie” the military knew there would never be an investigation into the legality of Bin Laden’s assassination.  Nor would there ever be any questions of war crimes.  But delivering a false report to your commanding officer on a military action as important, as this obviously was, is another legal matter, far more serious than Bradley Manning’s truth leak - it was treason.

Yes, Blum, it was murder. There is simply no other honest word for it. This country has been comfortable with murder (and its cousins slaughter & genocide) since its founding days.

What really scared me was Obama.  His Sunday night announcement describing the big firefight and how Bin Laden died gun in hand with his wife as a human shield was a chilling illustration of how the military/homeland security apparatus controls not just the information but the President.  Several days later, when the real story of the home invasion and cold-blooded murder came out, it became clear that the military had fed Obama the first “story”, aka blatant lies,  to humiliate and discredit him.  The military knew he was going to get credit for killing Bin Laden and the “set up” was their way of telling all of us, that Obama is clueless and powerless when it comes to what the military is doing.  It was their way of saying, “hail to the commander and frack-you chief”.

Al-Qaeda had declared an ongoing war on the US.
The US had declared war on Terrorism, terrorists, and those that harbored terrorists.
As a result there was a wanted dead or alive posting for OBL.

The time to complain and bring up the reasonableness of all three of these conditions was in the past 10 years.
Now its done some would want to micro exam exactly what happened in a few seconds during the mission that was conducted to execute the wanted poster and now decide if that action met their view of what possibly could of happened given some such set of presumed circumstances.

The chance for changing the existing circumstances existed for ten years. That chance included political means, media campaigns, and resorting to national and international law. Failing these the mutual declarations of war stood as did the resulting wanted poster.
Case Closed.

And wouldn’t sovereignty be considered an issue if, instead, some other country would pull off a similar kind of mission on US territory?

Gee, Virgin 777 ( here I though there were supposed to be only seventy two…)

Do you ever post an honest attempt at debate? If so I must have missed it. You really think your name change and series of the same old one liner stupidities bring you any credibility. Sad for you.

I repost that which set off the moron:

The guilt or innocence of Osama bin Laden is not to be decided by whim or passion, but should have been determined in a court of law. I though this so obvious as to be shocked by the number of Americans who think otherwise. If one person is not safe from government sponsored execution sans trial then none of our liberties are secure.

ardee:

“I though this so obvious as to be shocked by the number of Americans who think otherwise.”

If you think its obvious, I say, probably not.

Gerard: You are not wrong. I wish you had posted your latest post first, because your first post says none of these things.

I agree with you that OBL was a bogeyman used like Goldstein in 1984—to whip the US masses into hysteria and concentrate their anger on an _external_ threat.

In fact no credible evidence of his connection to 9/11 has been presented to the public and even the FBI has admitted he was not wanted for 9/11 because it has no hard evidence of his connection to 9/11.

Yet the corporate parrots impersonating journalists in the media go on parroting the official line that OBL was the “mastermind” of 9/11, and congratulating Obama on this extrajudicial killing, a killing which was illegal—as the US occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan are illegal.

Violence is not the answer to our problems, nationally or internationally.  But we must be clear that the forces that have taken over our democratic institutions—the White House, Congress, judiciary and media—are EXTREMELY violent, as a matter of course.  The people of Afghanistan know that violence. So do the Iraqi people and many other nations who have suffered from drone attacks, bombings with depleted uranium munitions, etc. 

The media forces that routinely lie to the public about who OBL was and the CIA’s cozy relationship with him, and with Pakistan’s ISI and Al Qaeda itself are very violent, because their pattern of lying justifies a longstanding pattern of State Crimes Against Democracy. They are cheerleaders for war, propagandists for the war machine.  America has become a country whose very existence is based on the creation and exporting of war: weapons of war are our largest export product, and about all we make here anymore. The Military Industrial Media Complex is constantly spewing out the “logic” of the latest wars, whether in Iraq or Afghanistan or Libya—where the latest bogeyman is Gaddafi.  The U.S. is now a country of, by and for the McDonald Douglasses, the Boeings, the Lockheed Martins.  A steady stream of lies and public mythology is necessary to hoodwink the public into believing their government stands for the promotion of Freedom and Democracy abroad, rather than the creation of “favorable investment climates” for Big Business.  That is where the corporate media come in, as they create the mythology, through failing to question anything of import and selectively reporting.

Memory Hole:  The relevance is in the fact that there’s a lot more going on in the Middle East than
bin Laden and other “bogey-men” who serve the purpose of arousing hatred, fear and violence to justify endless “wars against terror” etc. There is a lot more going on there that involves “moral and imaginative wherewithal” than can be discerned by concentrating on the extrajudicial murders being conducted now by various dictators whose autocratic powers are being challenged by popular uprisings of tens of thousands of weaponless men, women and children striving for their basic human rights. Violence is not the answer to political and social problems, and it doesn’t hurt to point that out.
  It does seem to me that the U.S. could do with a bit of “moral and imaginative wherewithal” itself.
Am I wrong?

So grym, what does your post have to do with the above story.Sounds like a lot of BS about nothing, with little but opinion about a lot of name dropping crap to make yourself sound more authoritative on the subject than us underlings. You are a professed Arab; what do you know about the Persians ? Lots of misdirection and gobbledegook here? Did you post to the wrong story?

Gerard,

I think overall a good article.  While there are things Professor Dabashi sees which I see differently, I have enjoyed his point of view in the past.

I can’t agree that Israel will not benefit by a surrounding of representative forms of government.  I think security will, overall, benefit greatly for both Israel and the West Bank and Gaza.  Closer to Statehood for Palestinians and much less dependents on, and support for, Hamas and Hezbollah. - No Iranian and Syrian benefactors.

I also don’t see the same Sideshow “misdirection” in the Larijani/Ahmadinejad feud.  That drama has been public -followed closely by the Persian public- for nearly ten years.  Iranians appear in no way distracted away from the growing and underlying Green Movement.

True or not Ali Larijani is seen by the ruling “liberal” elite as moderate and an advocate of openness, woman’s rights, and one for global compromise.  Both Mousavi and Karroubi hail from the Larijani side of Persian politik.  This context is missing from Professor Dabashi in this one article.

I get the impression that Professor Dabashi, in the class-warfare sense, sees the Larijani Brothers as you might the Koch family.

Gerard,

Your comment bears no apparent relation to the article to which it is appended. Faith without knowledge is blind; hope without wisdom is deluded; charity without compassion is arrogant.

If people want to read something that sounds half-way reasonable and a bit hopeful at this point, please access AlJazeeraEnglish, issue, 5/16/11, article “The Predicament of the Islamic Republic” by Hamid Dabachi, Professor Iranian Studies, Columbia Univ. 

Excerpt:  ...“The Green Movement has now reached deeply into its forceful constituen components in labor, women’s rights and the student movement. The ruling elite of the Islamic Republic does not have the moral or the imaginative wherewithal of withstanding the democratic chalenge coming from the Arab world to face up to the more deeprooted discontents at one and the same time.”...

Clinton is often wrong, but when she complimented AlJazeera in regard to her remarks on freedom of information, she was wise, I think. If we can just
keep our clamors down to a roar, and stop trying to
dominate, and insist we know it all, things may go better than expected by many who comment here. Faith. Hope. Charity.

Of course it was murder, whether it was OBL killed or some hapless stand-in, which we may never know since the tyrannical government which has overstepped its rightful Constitutional powers and now amounts to an illegal, immoral, corrupt entity that awaits the awakening of the American people…

The entire so called “war on terror” is an illegal war with no basis in either law or reality. It is an undeclared war, hence unconstitutional; it is an irrational war—because you cannot defeat “terrorism” which has been with humanity for centuries.  There is nothing in the Constitution which permits a president to order the assassination of ANYONE, US citizen or not, particularly in the absence of a declaration of war, and Congress has not declared war. 

Al Qaeda was and remains a CIA front, a cancerous network of ultra-extremist jihadists lavished with hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars funneled through the Pakistani ISI, in order to do the dirty work of Wall Street.

The US government is a rogue state no longer has any legitimacy whatsoever.  Not only does the world not look to it for leadership, the world shudders at its grotesque lies and arrogance, and awaits the fateful day when the American people finally wake up to the fact that they have lost their sacred Democratic Republic to a bloodthirsty oligarchy that will not stop its vicious criminality until the people withdraw their consent.

“Governments derive their just powers by the consent of the governed…”

Actually, I’ve been thinking that the execution of bin Laden (or ‘bin Laden’) is a sign that the government is tired of the fable and the game and wants to pursue other fables and other games.

bin Laden needed periodic dialysis to stay alive.
They said he never left the house, which means he had to have his own dialysis machine.
Look at all the photos taken inside the house - no dialysis machine anywhere. 
There’s more evidence Bigfoot is real than there is that bin Laden was killed in that house in Pakistan.

“Right wing think tank” is a contradiction in terms, unless it refers to waterboarding.

By the way folks, Go Right Young Man is just an Arab Bot- a piece of software that delivers occasional communiques from a computer located in some right wing think tank.

Obviously OBL’s execution (and that’s the ‘mot juste’) sans due process has done as much to anger the terrorist fringe, than the US history of imperialist aggression that triggered 9/11. In fact it hasn’t advanced the war on terror one iota except for the symbolic satisfaction that looks no different morally and legally than revenge. And that’s because terrorism cannot be localized in an individual or a country, because it is a strategy and a psychology, which is why it is so elusive and difficult to counter. The rhetoric that justified the Iraq war, nevertheless, did not require Saddam Houssein’s execution without trial. There were pictures, videos etc.. showing him in captivity.
Obama’s hypocrisy in not wanting to show OBL’s body because we’re above that sort of thing and it would incite hostility, is laughable in the face of the clearly deliberate nature of the execution and subsequent blowback.

Obviously OBL’s execution (and that’s the ‘mot juste’) sans due process has done as much to anger the terrorist fringe, than the US history of imperialist aggression that triggered 9/11. In fact it hasn’t advanced the war on terror one iota except for the symbolic satisfaction that looks no different morally and legally than revenge. And that’s because terrorism cannot be localized in an individual or a country, because it is a strategy and a psychology, which is why it is so elusive and difficult to counter. The rhetoric that justified the Iraq war, nevertheless, did not require Saddam Houssein’s execution without trial. There were pictures, videos etc.. showing him in captivity.
Obama’s hypocrisy in not wanting to show OBL’s body because we’re above that sort of thing and it would incite hostility, is laughable in the face of the clearly deliberate nature execution and subsequent blowback.

@anarcissie You are correct about that. There is no evidence, and this was stated by the FBI itself. In fact,when bin Laden was the number 1 most wanted man his wanted poster made no mention of 911 at all. He was wanted for U.S. embassy bombings in Africa. On only one of his so called videos does he admit to involvement in 911 and that video was the phoniest looking of all with many “experts” pointing out that the guy in the video didn’t even have the same facial features of bin Laden. I saw an article from a Pakistani newspaper back in 2001 that stated that bin Laden was dead from kidney disease. He was already in the advanced stages of his disease back then. Madeline Albright and many other heads of state had serious doubts years ago. But without this bogeyman for the oligarchs to parade around, our “war on terror” would not have as much steam behind it, and the drumbeat to the trillion dollar wars we are mired in would have not had quite the thunder. Yes, bin Laden is dead, in my opinion. I wonder who these chest thumping primates killed recently in Pakistan. And people wonder why certain of us want evidence. We never really get any now do we?

Is there persuasive, verifiable evidence that bin Laden was involved in 9/11?  I haven’t seen it.  I am surprised because it could easily be created, and practically everything that comes out of the Middle East seems indeed like a tale from the Arabian Nights anyway; the standard of verisimilitude is not set very high.

Sinbad,

I’ve noticed your use of English and syntax frequently changes.  At times jilted and halting.  Other times relaxed and easy.

-

We should never forget, nor willfully deny, that those involved in the U.S.S. Cole bombing, the East African Embassies bombings, the first World Trade Center bombing and the attacks on 9/11 claim that bin Laden’s boast to be behind those events are a reality.  In fact several of those self-proclaimed soldiers claim to have met and received directions and support from bin Laden.

The context is war.  Osama bin Laden was not killed simply for, as you say, having strong opinions.

AS:
Putting aside whether or not OBL was involved in 9/11 (and I think the evidence is far more compelling that he was than you do), he has clearly been involved in planning and funding other attacks on the United States. He declared the US an enemy when, at the request and with the blessing of the Saudi government, we opened military bases in Saudi Arabia. He objected to infidels on holy land, and that the legitimate government of that nation invited us, was irrelevant.

9/11 wasn’t a singular event in a vacuum.  He ordered the simultaneous bombing of multiple US embassies in Africa.  He ordered other attacks on the US.  He has ordered IED attacks on troops in Iraq.

He has openly made war on the United States. The general in charge of ordering the attack is far more responsible for the attack than the foot soldier who carries it out.  Osama Bin Laden was engaged in the planning, coordinating and funding of attacks around the world, not just on the USA, but on our allies (remember 3/11 in Spain?).

Now, should we have just left such an enemy alone?  Or should we have asked Pakistan to arrest him for us, when it’s clear they’ve known exactly where OBL has been for YEARS and kept it from us?

Just what SHOULD we have done with this enemy?

And, please, don’t tell me the man didn’t do anything to the USA.  Even if we leave out 9/11 (which is absurd), his history of attacks is clear, including the 1993 attack on the WTC (AKA, the gang that couldn’t shoot straight).

Go Right Young Man:

“There are at least two people who understand you are not what you claim.”

You and your shadow?

Morpheus:

“The man is dead.”

Who?

“Our country is falling apart and the world is on fire.”

And?

“And We basicaly ignore it because we don’t know what to do.”

No, we do not. Only some people do. Some of us know what to do, get off the couch and speak out. Lol.

Go Right Young Man:

“You’re reading from media sources.  Not good.”

I see. You prefer gossip. well, that does figure…

Inherit The Wind, May 14 at 8:04 pm

“Since Osama bin Laden was not a US citizen, a US resident, was not even in the US, and was openly hostile to the US, not just in words, but in deeds, he could reasonably be deemed an enemy, and was living in a nation that was clearly protecting him while flatly lying to the USA about helping hunt for him.  He made war on us.”
====================================================
ITW:

Basing myself precisely on your own words above, I deem the killing of Osama a cowardly bloody murder. The man never stepped on American soil to be considered physically and directly responsible for 9/11. He did not fly planes into the World Trade Center, nor any body had ever presented any material evidence that he even handed a weapon to any body and told him or her to go and kill Americans. That he was an enemy symbol of the United States is immaterial; certainly he was and that enmity was obviously mutual. There were times that you and I were open enemies, but that didn’t give you the right to kill me or the other way around. I am an open enemy of the Zionist establishment that occupied my homeland and killed many of my fellow Arabs and Muslims, but that doesn’t give anyone the right to try to kill me. I further, consider any person who is openly hostile and bigoted towards Muslims and Arabs to be my personal enemy; yet that doesn’t give me the right to personally murder that person execution style or otherwise. I might feel relieved if such enemy perishes at the hands of others, in an accident or in a natural disaster, but if I personally murder or attempt to murder that person, then I expect to stand for trial, but not to be executed by a gang of trained murderers.

Osama Bin Laden never admitted of personally planning or being directly involved in 9/11. Certainly,his words and speeches were hostile towards the US political-military America for the obvious reasons that all the world know, and that again was mutual hostility and enmity. I am an American and I admit of being hostile towards the American-political establishment because of their wrong-doings in many parts of the world, yet no body, from the president down, have the moral and legal right to murder me for my expressed hostility.

AS:
The Constitution specifically refers to the territory of the United States.  It’s much more vague and flexible regarding foreign relations.  Since Osama bin Laden was not a US citizen, a US resident, was not even in the US, and was openly hostile to the US, not just in words, but in deeds, he could reasonably be deemed an enemy, and was living in a nation that was clearly protecting him while flatly lying to the USA about helping hunt for him.  He made war on us.

A nation has the right to defend itself against those who make war on them.  We did.  He’s dead.

Also, OBL was born in 1957. You keep calling him an old man. 53 is not old. 83 is old. I’m older than he was and I’m hardly an old man.

kerryrose, May 14 at 2:42 pm
GRYM

Besides Pearl Harbor, The United States HAS NEVER
been invaded for any reason by the military of
another country.  That is the correct answer which
you failed to make although I am sure you realize it.
===========================================
Nit to pick with your statement;
The U.S. was invaded by the British in The War of
1812 and the west coast was bombed by the Japanese in
WWII.
But your point is taken.

The man is dead. Our country is falling apart and the world is on fire. And We basicaly ignore it because we don’t know what to do.

Wake up America. It’s time…
 
“THE REVOLUTION HAS STARTED”
Read “Common Sense 3.1” at ( http://www.revolution2.osixs.org )

FIGHT THE CAUSE - NOT THE SYMPTOM
“Spread the News”

Inherit The Wind, May 14 at 9:45 am:

I find it hard to believe that if Bin Laden had yelled “I Surrender!” and stuck up his hands that he would have been shot dead.  He knew who was coming for him.  And why.

But it doesn’t surprise me that TD is filled with posters who see EVERY enemy of the USA as a good guy, no matter how clear the evidence of their evil intentions against us.

Intentions are not offenses until the intender does something about them.

In bin Laden’s case, however, regardless of the truth, he was taken to be a military enemy and seems to have gone along with it, whether or not he had much if anything to do with 9/11.  (I believe he was merely a convenient boogie-man painted into the picture because one was needed, but this doesn’t affect the legal aspects of the case.)

As a supposedly active military enemy of the United States, supposedly willing to carry the war to the U.S., he could be legally killed at any time by any means.  So I don’t think the legality issue is going to go anywhere.  It is true one is supposed to accept the surrender of enemies, but given al-Qaeda’s penchant for blowing themselves up, such a surrender would have to have been carefully negotiated before commandos with machine guns showed up at the door. 

Now, had bin Laden denied being an enemy of the U.S., etc., then one might argue he had a legal right to a hearing.  As far as we know he went along with the terrorist archfiend mummery.  What everyone takes to be real becomes real.

This is not to say the rubout of bin Laden was morally right, or good policy; only that it was legal, and discussing its legality is a waste of time.  The construction of the bin Laden legend and the passionate belief of 90% of the population in it, after they had been steadily and visibly lied to by the government for generations, is more interesting.

Interesting:  This GRYM person has coats of many colors, ne?

By Michael Murry, May 14 at 2:13 am
(Unregistered commenter)

The Constitution of the United States—specifically, the Fifth Amendment—prohibits the Government of the United States from depriving ANY person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. The domestic terrorist, Timothy McVeigh, killed many innocent people when he bombed the Federal Building in Oklahoma City, yet he still stood trial for his crime. The President did not order military Special Operations Forces to summarily execute this suspected terrorist. The President had not the power to do so. The same Constitutional considerations apply to any other suspected terrorist criminal, domestic or foreign. The Constitution—which the President and every member of Congress take an oath to defend and faithfully execute—makes no exceptions for “war”—not of any kind or under any Orwellian euphemism such as “military force.”
======================================
I salute you for your thoughtful and well-articulated post. Though I thought I was the first to comment on this article because mine was published before yours, I am delighted to find a thought and spiritual affinity with a total stranger like you, once you piece was published.

I urge every one to go back and read your thoughtful post because it was the first written in reaction to this thread!

I suggest that you register with Truthdig so that your thoughtful posts would appear instantly after you hit the “submit” button!

GRYM

The point you failed to make was that GOON squads were trained by the United States in El Salvador and that Libyian GOON squads were responsible for several deaths in Europe NOT the Unites States.

Besides Pearl Harbor, The United States HAS NEVER been invaded for any reason by the military of another country.  That is the correct answer which you failed to make although I am sure you realize it.

Also, a true patriot holds his country to account- he/she does not give blind passes.

Sinbad - “In your stupidity and pretentious shallow knowledge, you have the audacity of claiming that you know my culture and people more than me; a thorough bred Arab and a scholar of Arabic language, literature and history.”

-

Most on this Web space would have no way of knowing that Sinbad is to Arabs as Squaw is to an North American Indian.  Arabs today consider Sinbad a Western invention.

Sindad, or Sindhi, is a fictional character likely influenced by Homer. - Ancient Greece.

There are at least two people who understand you are not what you claim.

Every killing is just a just killing if you just think killing is just.  Every war is just a just war if you just think war is just. Simple.

The last we heard from the real Bin Laden came in his post-9/11 statements to Pakistani journalists:

“I stress that I have not carried out this act, which appears to have been carried out by individuals with their own motivation… I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States… I had no knowledge of these attacks…”

And don’t forget that one of the last interviews Bhutto gave before her assassination was that the real OBL was dead.

All this evidence alone merits an official trial with non-partisian observers.  Too much blood has been shed and continues to be shed regarding 9/11 to accept unchallanged and unvetted ‘evidence’ in an attempt to sweep the whole affair under the rug with the burial at sea of the ‘mastermind’ of 9/11.

I’m not buying it and if you do I have a bridge to sell you.

Go Right Young Man, May 14 at 6:00 am

“Sinbad, your chosen nom de guerre is highly offensive to most Arabs.”
=====================================================
How many times have made this worn-out statement in response to my well-articulated and factual comments?! Obviously, when you don’t have anything of substance, you resort to such shallow comments!

In your stupidity and pretentious shallow knowledge, you have the audacity of claiming that you know my culture and people more than me; a thorough bred Arab and a scholar of Arabic language, literature and history.

The “Arabian Sinbad” symbolizes a period of renaissance when the ignorant and backward Europeans were bored to death, due to their backwardness, and they turned, with fascination, to the great source of literature and entertainment known as the Arabian Nights?! The Arabian Sinbad was roaming the world’s seas in quest of knowledge, discoveries and international trade, using navigation instruments that by the standard of the times were ahead of anything the world knew.

To help you reduce the levels of your ignorance, just bear in mind that Christopher Columbus, who so-called discovered the land were your types live now, was inspired by the Sinbad stories and he used Arab-Muslim sailors from Spain in his voyages in large numbers.

Now I know for sure that an ignoramus bigot like you will argue against the established facts that the Arab-Muslims invented Algebra and Algorithms, which are the bases of the modern revolution in computing, just to mention two examples of one-thousand and one of their inventive contributions to human civilization. And don’t forget that it was an Arab shepherd from Yemen who discovered coffee and introduced its growing and brewing industries to the world! Imagine how boring and deprived your sorrowful life would be without the coffee with which billions of people around the world start their working day!

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/05/13/nuremberg/i
ndex.html

“TD is filled with posters who see EVERY enemy of the USA as a good guy, no matter how clear the evidence of their evil intentions against us.”

-

Truer words have never been spoken.  It’s a true form of bigotry against an entire society.

“I find it hard to believe that if Bin Laden had yelled “I Surrender!”
and stuck up his hands that he would have been shot dead.”

Agreed.
Since a physician, directly acquainted with the medical treatment by C.I.A. physicians of Osama bin Laden, reported that bin Laden was dead at the time of 9-11, he was not on the scene of the alleged S.E.A.L. debacle. The bearded arab-type in the Hollywood-style debacle was not even a double. Which supports the older idea that Americans will believe anything “their government” says. Thus, a continuation of fraudulent information, which your religious prejudice compels you to support.
However.
Americans have begun to learn to smell such odoriferous falsifications.

By Lafayette, May 14 at 3:24 am

“The fact that there was no trial is not relevant. There was no trial for Che Guevara, none for Hitler, none for Mussolini. None for Attila the Hun, who was also put down.”
====================================================
In your rush to make a statement that conforms to your perverted ideology and concept of justice, you got some of your so-called facts wrong. One of them is about Hitler not receiving a trial. Hitler committed suicide, so there is no point for you to bring his case as prove to your perverted logic. The same applies to Che Guevara, who died or disappeared mysteriously. By the way, Che Guevara was and continues to be one of my heroes. If you don’t like that, you can go and drink the salty water of the sea! Or you can go and report me to the evil CIA establishment!

You forgot or rather ignored some basic facts of history. Among them that the Nazis killed tens of millions. Some of their surviving leaders were put to trial in the famous Nuremberg that you seem to be not aware of.

Hideki Tojo was the Emperor’s henchman in Japan who killed millions of Chinese, Koreans, Filipinos and a hundred thousand Americans. When the American soldiers went to arrest him after the war, he tried to commit suicide by shooting himself in the chest. Some more humanistic and far sighted soldiers than your current Navy SEALS murderers worked on stopping his bleeding and rushed him to an army hospital where he was saved by army doctors. He then had his day in court. Found guilty, he was hanged. Thus killers of millions were saved and captured alive to be forced to stand trial; yet an Arab / Muslim, accused of being responsible for the killing of some 3,000 got double-tapped in his pajamas.

In some metaphorical way, Osama Bin Laden won even in his death. Because of him, many sheepish citizens of the U.S. gave up their constitutional rights and freedoms, and notable among these the right and freedom to be assumed innocent until proven guilty.

Osama also won when he financially exhausted the treasury of the most prosperous country on earth, to become almost bankrupt and burdened with debt to the Chinese and the Saudis, over the short period of a decade. Prosperity that was accumulated in the previous two hundred years, just vanished on the watch of George Bush and Osama Bin Laden.

Osama bankrupted America to the tune of 3 trillion, and worse costing the lives of some 5,000-7,000 American troupes, and the count keeps mounting everyday, not to mention the killing of hundreds of thousands of civilian Iraqis, Afghans and Pakistanis. All that to avenge the death of some 3,000 people who perished on 9/11; a sad event that has yet to be investigated to determine the true culprits.

Two final sad notes about the event of the supposed murder of Osama: the official story from the Pentagon changed four times in the first four days alone; and a frat boy-style party was had on the site of the World Trade Center, whose owner got filthy rich collecting the hefty insurance he got on the building a short time before it collapsed!!!

I find it hard to believe that if Bin Laden had yelled “I Surrender!” and stuck up his hands that he would have been shot dead.  He knew who was coming for him.  And why.

But it doesn’t surprise me that TD is filled with posters who see EVERY enemy of the USA as a good guy, no matter how clear the evidence of their evil intentions against us.

You cannot know who your enemy is until you know who you are. More often than not, on serious inspection, you discover there is little difference. One can get extremely fascist in the pursuit of killing Nazis.

As a nation the US is so far beyond questions of legal fidelity that questioning the legal validity of OBL’s execution (which is exactly what it was) is not only moot, but pointless.

Are we a nation of laws? Not really.

kerryrose,

You’re reading from media sources.  Not good.

-

Why do so many people from this Web space immediately change the subject toward the perceived evils of the U.S. when they become aware of the wrongs of others?

El Salvador?  Really?  El Salvador has something to do with assassinations inside the United States?

Obama

“justice was done”

Perverted justice performed.  No trial by jury, no judge, just summary execution.

No real justice here, just speculation supported by inneuendo, followed by murder espoused as fact.

GRYM

In 1963, the U.S. government sent 10 Special Forces personnel to El Salvador to help General Jose Alberto Medrano set up the Organizacion Democratica Nacionalista (ORDEN)-the first paramilitary death squad in that country. These Green Berets assisted in the organization and indoctrination of rural “civic” squads which gathered intelligence and carried out political assassinations in coordination with the Salvadoran military.
Now, there is compelling evidence to show that for over 30 years, members of the U.S. military and the CIA have helped organize, train, and fund death squad activity in El Salvador.
In the last eight years, six Salvadoran military deserters have publicly acknowledged their participation in the death squads. Their stories are notable because they not only confirm suspicions that the death squads are made up of members of the Salvadoran military, but also because each one implicates U.S. personnel in death squad activity.
The term “death squad” while appropriately vivid, can be misleading because it obscures their fundamental identity. Evidence shows that “death squads” are primarily military or paramilitary units carrying out political assassinations and intimidation as part of the Salvadoran government’s counterinsurgency strategy. Civilian death squads do exist but have often been comprised of off-duty soldiers financed by wealthy Salvadoran businessmen.
It is important to point out that the use of death squads has been a strategy of U.S. counterinsurgency doctrine. For example, the CIA’s “Phoenix Program” was responsible for the “neutralization” of over 40,000 Vietnamese suspected of working with the National Liberation Front.
Part of the U.S. counterinsurgency program was run from the Office of Public Safety (OPS). OPS was part of U.S. AID, and worked with the Defense Department and the CIA to modernize and centralize the repressive capabilities of client state police forces, including those in El Salvador. In 1974 Congress ordered the discontinuation of OPS.
In spite of the official suspension of police assistance between 1974 and 1985, CIA and other U.S . officials worked with Salvadoran security forces throughout the restricted period to centralize and modernize surveillance, to continue training, and to fund key players in the death squad network.
Even though the U.S. government’s police training program had been thoroughly discredited, the Reagan administration found other channels through which to reinstate police assistance for El Salvador and Honduras. Attached to this assistance is the requirement that the president certify that aid recipients do not engage in torture, political persecution, or assassination. Even so, certain members of Congress showed concern over the reinstatement of police aid to repressive regimes. In a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, Senator Claiborne Pell (Dem.-Rhode Island) asked, “I was talking about cattle prods specifically. Would they be included or not?”

Your example is not a good one.  Only one student in Michigan was reported as an attempted assassination by a Libyan agent.

What’s all this business about America’s “devotion to law?” Ha!
Like the time we launched a preventive war against Iraq without prior UN Security Council authority? As in Gitmo? As in John Yoo? As in Bush v. Gore?
Devotion to law like the way we wink at Israel’s flouting of the 4th Geneva Convention? Or like the absence of prosecutorial interest in Wall Street’s systematic corruption? Like the way we turned a blind eye to the homicide of Turkish-American citizen Furkan Dogan?
Maybe you didn’t get the memo, but “serving the empire” has replaced “devotion to law.”

kerryrose,

Yes, soldiers.  Gaddafi’s “Death” Squads” was not a collection of teachers and plumbers.  At least 4 men and 1 woman was killed on U.S. soil.  Several in Italy, several in Rome and several in Jordan and Egypt.

Then there are those the Chinese have assassinated on U.S. soil.  Also the Russians from the former Soviet Union.  Roughly seven years ago the Chilean government killed a Colombian journalist in New York. - This is a fairly common occurrence.

You can find this type of information by regularly following the U.S. State Dept. informational releases.  Not the media.  The media believes you and I don’t care about a Colombian journalist.

GRYM

Too vague.  Explain a Libyan military exercise that was performed on US soil in the 1980’s.  By military I mean soldiers.

Kerryrose,

That should have read 1980’s.

kerryrose,

Libya, 1988, would likely be the most notorious.

GRYM

Name one military exercise performing assassination that took place on American soil by another country.

Kerryrose,

Assassinations by foreign entities happen on U.S. soil regularly.  At times the U.S. protests.  Other times the U.S. will let it pass.

A very small percentage of Arabs or Muslims will find themselves offended by how bin Laden met his end.

Yes it was murder, the question is did he deserve
it… and yes of course he did.
OBL was “taken out” for political purposes - and thats
the true crime - he should have been taken into custody
and made to suffer for how ever long he still had to
live. Killing him was expedient and created the
immediate rise in poll numbers the killing was designed
for.
Careful BHO, your transparency is showing again.

The context is that of war. 

Osama bin Laden declared himself a soldier.  As much as most people are uncomfortable with death, bin Laden was killed in a war he vowed to fight.

The death is legal by all standards of armed conflict which have been in place for thousands of years. - Time to move on.

-

Sinbad, your chosen nom de guerre is highly offensive to most Arabs.

I can’t understand the term commenters use ‘lawful murder.’  Revenge is not lawful. 

Imagine, in an empathic way (try to pretend you are not American), if Pakistan had someone on a ‘hit’ list who they discovered was hiding in the U.S.  Let’s say they decided to fly a team of military into our air space, land, engage in assissination, and then cart the body and ransacked materials out.

How would the US respond to our breached sovierenty?  We wouldn’t tolerate it.  Is our soveirenty more soviern than other countries.  Is this what American exceptionalism is all about? 

We will get ours.

His killing was “lawful”, since he was a declared combatant in a war against terrorists. He was guilty of perpetrating killing on American soil.

So,Lafayette so willingly allows his government to be judge, jury and executioner. I would hope, fervently, that his opinion is not shared so easily without a bit more thought given to what I see as a further erosion of our democratic way of life.

Further,to base this opinion on another opinion, namely; that we are in a state of war is to make all law if not all logic absurd and subject to the whim of the moment. Wars ,by definition, are fought between nations, not against a few thousand fanatics from various nations. 9/11 should have engendered a world wide police action, not the invasion of two nations, one of which had no terrorists within its borders, nor any weapons of mass destruction either.

That GWBush used 9/11 with such shabby and personal motivations, to make himself a wartime President and push his desire to create a Unitary Executive, is fact, that Obama continues this policy is more than sad, it is, in my opinion traitorous.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.”

The guilt or innocence of Osama bin Laden is not to be decided by whim or passion, but should have been determined in a court of law. I though this so obvious as to be shocked by the number of Americans who think otherwise. If one person is not safe from government sponsored execution sans trial then none of our liberties are secure.

“You’re right, but it was lawful murder. (Murder = the unlawful premeditated
killing of one person by another.)”  Lafayette, May 14 at 3:24 am

“to slaughter in a brutal manner” seems to fit this situation much better.  The
nature of U.S. presence in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Egypt, Libya, Iran and
other Mid-East, self-governing nations continues to be refuted by attorneys and
students of the U.S. Constitution.  Circumnavigation via “executive privilege”
is illegal, and an insult to Americans and the entire world.  Just as NAZI-types
knew in the 1930s how to misuse the trust of German folk, they have misused the
trust of American folk in the U.S.A.

The F.B.I. found no evidence that Osama bin Laden was associated with 9-11,
which voids the family Bush´s scapegoating of Osama bin Laden as the perpetrator
of 9-11.  Additionally, all pilots and aviation mechanics, who have viewed the
results of an airliner crash, know that no airliner crashed into the Pentagon. 
Thousands of hours of research and compilations by scientists and aviators were
unnecessary.  Absent tons of aluminum, blood and guts spattered on the outer
wall of the Pentagon, similar rubble on the lawn, plus fires from jet fuel,
initial TV coverage proved:  no airliner crashed into the Pentagon.

Getting at the genuine perpetrator of war on terror evil requires evaluating the
evidence of why Osama bin Laden was hired to perform as the scapegoat in the
family Bush “War on Terror.”  Which, when viewed in its verifiable context,
indicates that the guilty, contrary to your postulate, “Nor will there ever be
for those of his kind who try to hide from Justice,“ can indeed hide from
justice for extended periods of time.  While they continue to have lampshades
made from the skins of humans, a std. NAZI practice of the 1930s, evidenced in
1985 in Brownsville, Texas.  Placing 90-yr-old corporals on trial for carrying
out the orders of their officers, as in Munich, Germany, instead of locating and
trying those guilty of the decisions, is obviously the “Order of the Day.” 
http://www.sueddeutsche.de/muenchen/urteil-gegen-john-demjanjuk-der-stempel-der-
schuld-1.1096731

Elevating war criminals such as Werner von Braun and Hubertus Strughold to US
Hero status, required high-level, NAZI string-pulling.  And still does, in 2011
in the USA and also in Germany.

You might try visualizing your own skin being cut and torn from your torso, as
you feel continuing, immense pain, while bleeding profusely, until your CNS is
overloaded, says “no more,” and turns off your heart.  Which, has happened to
many, who were not first killed and then skinned. And which may happen to many
current pimps, once their usefulness is no longer needed. As with the “image” of
bin Laden.  “to slaughter in a brutal manner”.

YOU CAN RUN BUT YOU CANNOT HIDE

AS: Yes, it was murder!

You’re right, but it was lawful murder. (Murder = the unlawful premeditated killing of one person by another.)

His killing was “lawful”, since he was a declared combatant in a war against terrorists. He was guilty of perpetrating killing on American soil.

By what wild stretch of the imagination can one think he was an “innocent” and those who died on 9/11 were the “murderers”?

The fact that there was no trial is not relevant. There was no trial for Che Guevara, none for Hitler, none for Mussolini. None for Attila the Hun, who was also put down. 

MY POINT

There is much historical precedence for his planned murder. “Live by the sword and die by the sword”. No law is involved in the process.

Nor will there ever be for those of his kind who try to hide from Justice.

You can run but you can’t hide ...

Yes, it was murder!

Yes, it was a cowardly act for a large number of so-called “brave Navy SEALS” to murder an old, unarmed man when he could have been apprehended to stand a trial!

Yes, it was a disgrace that a large number of intoxicated Americans cheered and celebrated the death of a man who was never involved physically or personally in the events of 9/11 or any other terrorist act.

And yes, it was adding insult to injury to dump his body in the sea!

And yes, it was stupid and short-sighted not to think about the consequences of such savage act in further recruiting more “martyrs” to the cause of which Osama stood as just a symbol; a symbol of resistance to foreign occupation and destruction of Muslim lands, which all started with resistance to the Soviet Union, with the full moral and material support of the hypocritical United States when it served their own imperial designs!

And yes, it was the epitome of stupidity not to think about the reaction of the Osama’s followers and their determination to avenge his death at any cost; for it has been established in the law of nature and the law of human nation that “for every action there is a reaction.”

And yes, such murder of Osama does not end terrorism and counter-terrorism, but rather gives it a new lease on life and other ugly dimensions that only the merchants of death find in it a reason to celebrate!