Osama Bin Laden killed by US in Pakistan

[WhoWee]

Even if so [note that Fox reported Osama was killed by a bomb a week ago] that was four years ago.

Obama got him in just over two years without the use of torture.

This seems like a good time to repeat myself:

He's dead - "courtesy of the red, white and blue" - enjoy it.

 

[DaveC426913]

As for the conspiracy theorists, this is an easy one. If Bin laden shows up in a video within the next few months, they lied. If not, he's dead.

Nope. Conspiracy rule #1. If you start a conspiracy, make sure it is possible that it can never be disproven.

Lack of evidence of OBL will not be enough to convince conspiracists that this is for realz.

 

[Pengwuino]

Obama got him in just over two years without the use of torture.

Source?

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ikAZCh0ww4Y1tnn_VhV3j8H5GTEg?docId=64273c49498c4331bd1c50206122d760

Officials say CIA interrogators in secret overseas prisons developed the first strands of information that ultimately led to the killing of Osama bin Laden.

Current and former U.S. officials say that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, provided the nom de guerre of one of bin Laden's most trusted aides. The CIA got similar information from Mohammed's successor, Abu Faraj al-Libi. Both were subjected to harsh interrogation tactics inside CIA prisons in Poland and Romania.

Let's not BS each other and think everything was roses and fairy dust to get this guy.

 

[Mech_Engineer]

Have you visited any right-wing forums lately?

Nope, not a member of any (unless PF counts ;-) ).

But it is interesting that where Bush failed after 7 years, Obama got him in 2; without the use of torture.

You're aware of course that the start of the thread that led to OBL was Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Guantanamo Bay. And let's not forget that since Guantanamo is still open Obama is now the one responsible for it.

 

[Borg]

I don't care who gets the credit. I would like to shake the hands of the military personnel who carried this off. I'll bet that they don't care about each other's political affiliation either.

 

[Newai]

By definition, they can't know that until they catch him.

How can we say what he knows if we can't even find him. The assertion fails with no need of further consideration.

Cool, I see John Brennan has (an hour ago) explained that they were prepared to take him alive.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9mJMdcqGeA

 

[tiny-tim]

i notice that this thread has 110 replies and only 111 views …

is this a record? ​

 

[DaveC426913]

i notice that this thread has 110 replies and only 111 views …

is this a record? ​

Opinions are like ***holes. Everybody has one.

 

[Pengwuino]

If they had caught him alive, it would have been just that much sweeter. It's too bad that he decided to go out shooting.

 

[qspeechc]

His options were lie down and be captured, or resist and die. I guess we know which one he chose. He didn't die because the seals were there to carry out a death sentence, he's dead because he probably shot at them.

Did the USA really want to give Osama a fair trial? I'm not convinced. With the chance of him getting off on a technicality, and the burden of proof resting on Osama's prosecutors, I think the Americans would be happier with him being dead. Also we simply have to take their word for it that he put up a fight, that he fired back, he used a woman as a human shield, he was shot in the head etc., because so far all we have is the word of the American army.

And this business about his burial strikes me as odd, there is nothing Islamic about being buried within 24hrs, or so a muslim friend tells me. For me enough details and evidence have not come to light.

 

[Borg]

i notice that this thread has 110 replies and only 111 views …

is this a record? ​

My subscribed threads has been showing it as having 0 views all day.

 

[WhoWee]

And this business about his burial strikes me as odd, there is nothing Islamic about being buried within 24hrs, or so a muslim friend tells me. For me enough details and evidence have not come to light.

Was there anything Islamic about 911?

He chose to take on the US - it was only a matter of time.

 

[JaredJames]

And this business about his burial strikes me as odd, there is nothing Islamic about being buried within 24hrs, or so a muslim friend tells me. For me enough details and evidence have not come to light.

The only time I've heard that is in reference to the inability for people to store the bodies for long periods in the Middle East (families not having access to proper refrigeration to store the dead) and so decay sets in rather rapidly.

 

[mugaliens]

Honestly what's more important- the fact that OBL is dead, or trying to convince the world that he is? In my opinion, as long as he's dead it doesn't matter what everyone else thinks...

He's definitely dead, but I feel what's most important is whether or not a U.S. President who willingly violates U.S. federal law prohibiting assassination would take further steps against the citizens of the U.S.

And, yes, Obama DID break the law, and quite flagrently. Do you honestly believe we've been utterly incapable of finding him and taking him out for the last 10 years?

Pspsppspppgbbppbppbh! (<--- that's what we used to call a "raspberry")

We could have done so at any given time. We didn't, however, because it's ILLEGAL. Assassination is MURDER.

Obama did it anyway because he thinks he can get away with it. Who know? Perhaps he can get away with breaking a very important law:

Judge Abraham Sofaer, former federal judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, wrote on the subject:

When people call a targeted killing an "assassination," they are attempting to preclude debate on the merits of the action. Assassination is widely defined as murder, and is for that reason prohibited in the United States... U.S. officials may not kill people merely because their policies are seen as detrimental to our interests... But killings in self-defense are no more "assassinations" in international affairs than they are murders when undertaken by our police forces against domestic killers. Targeted killings in self-defense have been authoritatively determined by the federal government to fall outside the assassination prohibition.​

 

[JaredJames]

He's definitely dead, but I feel what's most important is whether or not a U.S. President who willingly violates U.S. federal law prohibiting assassination would take further steps against the citizens of the U.S.

And, yes, Obama DID break the law, and quite flagrently. Do you honestly believe we've been utterly incapable of finding him and taking him out for the last 10 years?

Pspsppspppgbbppbppbh! (<--- that's what we used to call a "raspberry")

We could have done so at any given time. We didn't, however, because it's ILLEGAL. Assassination is MURDER.

Obama did it anyway because he thinks he can get away with it. Who know? Perhaps he can get away with breaking a very important law:

Judge Abraham Sofaer, former federal judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, wrote on the subject:

When people call a targeted killing an "assassination," they are attempting to preclude debate on the merits of the action. Assassination is widely defined as murder, and is for that reason prohibited in the United States... U.S. officials may not kill people merely because their policies are seen as detrimental to our interests... But killings in self-defense are no more "assassinations" in international affairs than they are murders when undertaken by our police forces against domestic killers. Targeted killings in self-defense have been authoritatively determined by the federal government to fall outside the assassination prohibition.​

You saying OBL was assassinated? I'd love to see the sources for that.

 

[Newai]

-snip-

Obama did it anyway because he thinks he can get away with it. Who know? Perhaps he can get away with breaking a very important law:

Judge Abraham Sofaer, former federal judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, wrote on the subject:

When people call a targeted killing an "assassination," they are attempting to preclude debate on the merits of the action. Assassination is widely defined as murder, and is for that reason prohibited in the United States... U.S. officials may not kill people merely because their policies are seen as detrimental to our interests... But killings in self-defense are no more "assassinations" in international affairs than they are murders when undertaken by our police forces against domestic killers. Targeted killings in self-defense have been authoritatively determined by the federal government to fall outside the assassination prohibition.​

And the rest of Sofaer's commentary goes on to say:

While targeted killing is and should be a legitimate option in the protection of our national security, its utility will depend on its principled, considered and responsible implementation.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/03/26/EDGK65QPC41.DTL&ao=2

 

[MacLaddy]

Assassinate away...

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/opinion/articles/050825/25simon.htm

 

[WhoWee]

It looks like we need to get back on track:

This seems like a good time to repeat myself:

He's dead - "courtesy of the red, white and blue" - enjoy it.

 

[Evo]

He's definitely dead, but I feel what's most important is whether or not a U.S. President who willingly violates U.S. federal law prohibiting assassination would take further steps against the citizens of the U.S.

And, yes, Obama DID break the law, and quite flagrently. Do you honestly believe we've been utterly incapable of finding him and taking him out for the last 10 years?

Pspsppspppgbbppbppbh! (<--- that's what we used to call a "raspberry")

We could have done so at any given time. We didn't, however, because it's ILLEGAL. Assassination is MURDER.

Obama did it anyway because he thinks he can get away with it. Who know? Perhaps he can get away with breaking a very important law:

Sorry mugs, but you are out of touch with current law. What the Presdient did is quite legal.

However, following the 1998 bombings of the American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, and on the basis of a (secret) favorable legal opinion, President Bill Clinton issued a presidential finding (equivalent to an executive order) authorizing the use of lethal force in self-defense against Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. Shortly thereafter, seventy-five Tomahawk cruise missiles were launched at a site in Afghanistan where Osama Bin Laden was expected to attend a summit meeting. Following the attacks of September 11, 2001, President George Bush reportedly made another finding that broadened the class of potential targets beyond the top leaders of Al-Qaeda, and also beyond the boundaries of Afghanistan. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld ordered Special Operations units to prepare a plan for “hunter killer teams,” with the purpose of killing, not capturing, terrorist suspects. Using the war paradigm for counterterrorism enabled government lawyers to distinguish lethal attacks on terrorists from prohibited assassinations and justify them as lawful battlefield operations against enemy combatants

President Barack Obama’s administration has not changed the policy on targeted killings; in fact, it ordered a “dramatic increase” in the drone-launched missile strikes against Al-Qaeda and Taliban members in Pakistan. According to commentators, there were more such strikes in the first year of Obama’s administration than in the last three years of the Bush administration. CIA operatives have reportedly been involved in targeted killing operations in Yemen and Somalia as well, although in Yemen the operations are carried out by Yemeni forces, with the CIA assisting in planning, munitions supply, and tactical guidance. Obama has also left intact the authority granted by his predecessor to the CIA and the military to kill American citizens abroad, if they are involved in terrorism against the United States.

http://harvardnsj.com/2010/06/law-and-policy-of-targeted-killing/

 

[Pengwuino]

I'm still loving this story about the guy who live-tweeted the raid on Osama and didn't realize it.

 

[Borg]

I'm still loving this story about the guy who live-tweeted the raid on Osama and didn't realize it.

LOL. A coworker was telling me about that this morning. :rofl:

 

[Dale]

Obama got him in just over two years without the use of torture.

:rofl: how naive

 

[russ_watters]

Terrorism does not stop with osama bin laden.He is one of those who has sowed the seeds for extreme ideology.So while this is a moral or whatever else type of victory someone may say, the ideology is pretty much alive.

Of course it doesn't stop with his death. All he was is by far the most successful individual terrorist in history.

 

[Pengwuino]

Of course it doesn't stop with his death. All he was is by far the most successful individual terrorist in history.

One of the talking heads last night said it best. He mentioned an attempt on Hitler's life during WWII and he made the comparison to Bin Laden. He said if Hitler was killed, the war would not have ended that day but it would have ended sooner. Same deal here, killing Bin Laden doesn't stop terrorism, but it's unquestionably a blow against terrorism.

Someone also mentioned the same comparison in a different context and I was wondering if this is true. Whoever was on said that during WW2, you took an oath to Hitler and not really to Nazism or Germany. They compared this to how people took an oath to Bin Laden and not to Al Qaeda. I wonder how true this is.

 

[russ_watters]

Did the USA really want to give Osama a fair trial? I'm not convinced. With the chance of him getting off on a technicality...

No national legal system in the world could handle such a trial fairly and the unfairness swings in both directions. Killing him the way he was killed - regardless of if there was a serious attempt to capture him alive - is the best possible outcome.

 

[rootX]

Did the USA really want to give Osama a fair trial? I'm not convinced. With the chance of him getting off on a technicality, and the burden of proof resting on Osama's prosecutors, I think the Americans would be happier with him being dead. Also we simply have to take their word for it that he put up a fight, that he fired back, he used a woman as a human shield, he was shot in the head etc., because so far all we have is the word of the American army.

And this business about his burial strikes me as odd, there is nothing Islamic about being buried within 24hrs, or so a muslim friend tells me. For me enough details and evidence have not come to light.

It can be argued that discussion of fair/unfair might be irrelevant and currently purely skeptical.

Nonetheless, he will be a great historical figure. He was very successful at what he did. Maybe 50-100 years from now, we will have a complete description of what happened in this past decade and important lessons we can get out of this. It bit too early to analyze the past decade events.

 

[KingNothing]

Yeah, those of you who are bitching about a fair trial, and those of you who think that rules of engagement would be followed in such a case clearly have never seen combat. In reality it doesn't always go by the books.

 

[bobze]

I haven't read this entire thread so maybe someone has asked this already, but, they said they confirmed with DNA testing that it was Osama, so what DNA did they compare it too? They already had Osama's DNA? That's odd.

His relatives, which is how fingerprinting is done. Which had been acquired previously when we thought we got his *** with predator-drones.

See story http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=80108&page=1".

 

[russ_watters]

But it is interesting that where Bush failed after 7 years, Obama got him in 2; without the use of torture.

When speculating, you really need to set it off with something like "it looks like...", Ivan, because you're stating as a fact something you couldn't possibly know for sure and as it turns out, the first point is certainly wrong and the second is probably wrong:

A new lead emerged when post-9/11 detainees gave investigators a glimpse into the al Qaeda chief's inner circle, the official said. During questioning, detainees repeatedly mentioned the nickname of a man they said was one of the few couriers bin Laden trusted.

That was the beginning of what President Barack Obama's top counterterrorism adviser described as a painstaking process.

"From the nickname, we tried to find out his real name," a senior U.S. official familiar with the operation said. "It was classic espionage and intel work."

Investigators knew the courier -- a protege of 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed -- was "important," because a number of detainees held out on providing information about him, the senior U.S. official said. [emphasis added]

http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/05/02/bin.laden.hunt/index.html?hpt=T1&iref=BN1

Translation: it took some effort to pry the information loose.

 

[russ_watters]

As for the conspiracy theorists, this is an easy one. If Bin laden shows up in a video within the next few months, they lied. If not, he's dead.

Be careful what you wish for. I heard on a news report and a radio report that Bin Laden likely made a recent video.

 

[russ_watters]

His relatives, which is how fingerprinting is done. Which had been acquired previously when we thought we got his *** with predator-drones.

See story http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=80108&page=1".

That's very interesting, thanks!

 

[Pengwuino]

Be careful what you wish for. I heard on a news report and a radio report that Bin Laden likely made a recent video.

I heard that as well but it was claimed that the video was made before his death, which makes sense since it usually is more than a few weeks, according to intelligence officials, from when the video is made to when it is publicized.

 

[russ_watters]

I heard that as well but it was claimed that the video was made before his death...

Yes, typically people have difficulty holding still for the camera when dead. :uhh:

Besides which, I don't think he'd really want to make the video after he died, since that would only serve to prove he was dead!

 

[Pengwuino]

Yes, typically people have difficulty holding still for the camera when dead. :uhh:

Besides which, I don't think he'd really want to make the video after he died, since that would only serve to prove he was dead!

"dead" :)

 

[pergradus]

I really doubt there is a conspiracy here, but I do think we're not being told the full truth.

If Osama had died earlier than this, people would probably have known - Al Qaeda would have said something, or someone would have leaked it.

I can understand Obama wanting to use this for maximum political gain - both at home and in the Muslim world. He wants to show he respects Muslim faith and tradition, and people probably would have been angry if we brought the body back to the United States.