Revenge is a dish best served cold Osama!!!

[TRF C A Iversen]

You're an Osama lover if you feel that everyone has the right to a fair trial?
Then can kill the f**ker afterwards, but he should've at least had a trial, even if it was just "You're guilty - death by hanging" or whatever

I never said that. I haven't twisted your words as you have just done with mine. I spoke of Osama lovers, I never claimed people were one. What triggered you to feel that you were one? I have no idea.

Yeah everyone has a right to a fair trial, I just feel that Osama has had his, he has publicly owned up and confessed to being involved in plotting, organising and assisting in the 911 attacks.

For many, many years we have all known that Osama was be taken "dead or alive" by the US if they could get to him, due to him being implicated to a degree of certainty (that's 100%) in terrorist activities. Where was everyone's opinion for demanding fair trials on here when that was the status quo? Where?

There's war going on, it was never going to result in Osama receiving a "Now-now" ing, with a waggling finger in his face.

 

[lucky number 7]

had osama been held in custody all hell would have broken loose...westerners all over the middle east would have been kidnapped and held ransom/ killed by his followers.. the only option was to kill

 

[nickdnz]

had osama been held in custody all hell would have broken loose...westerners all over the middle east would have been kidnapped and held ransom/ killed by his followers.. the only option was to kill

Al Qaeda would not have tried to free Bin Laden, that would be a suicide mission...

 

[TRF_Cymro]

Al Qaeda would not have tried to free Bin Laden, that would be a suicide missions...

They probably would have.

 

[lucky number 7]

No but in the sense that they would demand his release ...but since when have Al Queda been put off by a suicide mission ..they have guys blow them selves up daily for their perverse "cause"

 

[Charles]

had osama been held in custody all hell would have broken loose...westerners all over the middle east would have been kidnapped and held ransom/ killed by his followers.. the only option was to kill

Any proof to back this baseless assumption? They're expecting retaliation anyway. The only thing they have achieved by this is losing the moral high ground that is the vey base of what they are supposed to be fighting for...

 

[TRF C A Iversen]

Any proof to back this baseless assumption? They're expecting retaliation anyway. The only thing they have achieved by this is losing the moral high ground that is the vey base of what they are supposed to be fighting for...

So, you have proof too for everything you've said? Al Qaeda have the moral high ground? Wow. Or perhaps you haven't read properly how that sounds? Who are you saying has this "moral high ground", that you say someone has?

 

[lucky number 7]

Any proof to back this baseless assumption? They're expecting retaliation anyway. The only thing they have achieved by this is losing the moral high ground that is the vey base of what they are supposed to be fighting for...

http://www.rferl.org/content/AlQaeda_Calls_For_Foreign_Kidnappings_In_Afghanistan/1823795.html

Fairly conclusive

 

[Charles]

So, you have proof too for everything you've said? Al Qaeda have the moral high ground? Wow. Or perhaps you haven't read properly how that sounds? Who are you saying has this "moral high ground", that you say someone has?

What I am saying are not facts, they are mainly deductions from the present situation. Reasoned opinions, if you prefer. there's no really need of proof in the realm of ideas, as long as you follow logical deduction.

Where have I said the Al Qaeda has the moral high ground, could you show me? I'm very interested.

I think you haven't been reading properly, or perhaps my english is not clear enough. The US had the moral high ground because they are a democracy, they enjoy freedoms such as the right to vote, the freedom of religion, justice (rule of law, right to a fair trial) and they were the victim. They are supposed to be fighting for Freedom and Democracy, which is why the good guys are on their side and can somehow accept the numerous killings of innocents, the illegal prison of Guantanamo and so on.

Going to Irak on false pretenses aside, killing Bin Laden without indicting him, without a trial, is the exact negation of what they are supposed to fight for. If they wanted to show the world that in the end those freedoms are just pretexts, they couldn't have done better.

I can't really be clearer than this I'm afraid.

Lucky number 7, this article is from 2009. It has absolutely nothing to do with the possible consequeces of Bin Laden death. Not that it really matters but anyway...

 

[nickdnz]

No but in the sense that they would demand his release ...but since when have Al Queda been put off by a suicide mission ..they have guys blow them selves up daily for their perverse "cause"

I think people missed the irony in my post.

 

[Teh Mite]

Wasn't Bin Laden given a trial in his absence after 9/11 anyway?

 

[lucky number 7]

I think people missed the irony in my post.

I am sorry....I fail at this....I am going to go rethink my life

 

[TRF C A Iversen]

Wasn't Bin Laden given a trial in his absence after 9/11 anyway?

Not sure, but if he hadn't he still could've gone in and had a trial anytime in the last 10 years, didn't choose to do so. He was a fugitive from justice. He admitted to his crimes publicly. Of course that's not enough for some.

 

[shtove]

What I am saying are not facts, they are mainly deductions from the present situation. Reasoned opinions, if you prefer. there's no really need of proof in the realm of ideas, as long as you follow logical deduction.

Where have I said the Al Qaeda has the moral high ground, could you show me? I'm very interested.

I think you haven't been reading properly, or perhaps my english is not clear enough. The US had the moral high ground because they are a democracy, they enjoy freedoms such as the right to vote, the freedom of religion, justice (rule of law, right to a fair trial) and they were the victim. They are supposed to be fighting for Freedom and Democracy, which is why the good guys are on their side and can somehow accept the numerous killings of innocents, the illegal prison of Guantanamo and so on.

Going to Irak on false pretenses aside, killing Bin Laden without indicting him, without a trial, is the exact negation of what they are supposed to fight for. If they wanted to show the world that in the end those freedoms are just pretexts, they couldn't have done better.

I can't really be clearer than this I'm afraid.

Perfectly clear.

 

[Feicarsinn]

What I am saying are not facts, they are mainly deductions from the present situation. Reasoned opinions, if you prefer. there's no really need of proof in the realm of ideas, as long as you follow logical deduction.

Where have I said the Al Qaeda has the moral high ground, could you show me? I'm very interested.

I think you haven't been reading properly, or perhaps my english is not clear enough. The US had the moral high ground because they are a democracy, they enjoy freedoms such as the right to vote, the freedom of religion, justice (rule of law, right to a fair trial) and they were the victim. They are supposed to be fighting for Freedom and Democracy, which is why the good guys are on their side and can somehow accept the numerous killings of innocents, the illegal prison of Guantanamo and so on.

Going to Irak on false pretenses aside, killing Bin Laden without indicting him, without a trial, is the exact negation of what they are supposed to fight for. If they wanted to show the world that in the end those freedoms are just pretexts, they couldn't have done better.

I can't really be clearer than this I'm afraid.

Lucky number 7, this article is from 2009. It has absolutely nothing to do with the possible consequeces of Bin Laden death. Not that it really matters but anyway...

Excellent post.