How they really found Osama Bin Ladin

Apparently they have had opportunities to kill the ALLEGED 9/11 financier / mastermind in the past. How will this not even make the situation worse? The grand martyr!

 

that is not the question, nor do I agree with your assumption about previous opportunities.

How will it make it better?

Obviously you don't know anyone killed on 9/11.

I feel friggin' great!

Mark, let me give you some advice so you don't post anything that could be harmful to others......

For the Americans on this site, and especially for those who have had friends or family killed on 9/11, this is not political, this is personal. This is retribution.

I hope he burns in hell for all eternity.

Steve

 

Steve, i repeat the ALLEGED as in there's no proof that he was involved.

He certainly latched onto it for kudos sake after the initial denial.

I meant it could possibly make it worse, as now he could be thought of as THE MARTYR.

Steve, my advice is for you to not so easily believe such unsubstantiated propoganda.

I feel sad for the relatives of the 9/11 victims, as much as I feel for the relatives of those civilian victims of our aggression/invasion of the middle east.

If Britain and the USA and "allies" hadn't have meddled in the Middle East then probably 9/11 would not have occurred, whoever was responsible.

Mark

 

Mark:

I don't know about your skill and knowledge in other areas, but as far as THIS is concerned, you're an idiot.

There is absolutely no doubt, none whatsoever, that Bin Laden was a homicidal maniac responsible for the murder of thousands of innocent men, women and children. He was the devil incarnate.

Do not dare question my beliefs, deep conviction or factual stand on this matter.

I suggest you move on to another topic. Perhaps something to do with feet.

Steve

 

...and you are a gullible twat sir

...if you're referring to 9/11 then there is absolutely NO proof he is responsible, as for being the devil incarnate I would have to agree that the people(s) behind 9/11 are despicable/vile, as are any decision-makers responsible for the death of civilians

.. i don't doubt your beliefs, anyone who refers to Rush Limbaugh as a source must have skewed opinions (i'm a Glenn Greenwald believer myself)...

Mark

 

He was undoubtedly a bad man, and got what was coming to him. Although the manner in which he received justice troubles me, and the timescale is more than a bit suspicious.

But like the FBI, I've seen no evidence that he was responsible for 9 11. The Jalalabad video is an obvious fake. The testamony of KSM was acheived under torture and such confessions are notoriously unreliable!

It suits our psychology to have a single locus of blame for what we don't like. The truth, I suspect, is that bin laden was no more personally responsible for 9 11 than Obama was personally responsible for killing him. If al quaeda assassinated Obama, would that end the "war on terror". No. Will the death of bin laden affect the jihad? No.

 

Folks while are very divisive issue can we keep the personal attacks out of the discussion. Please



Mike ( my 1st type Moderation type post) Craig you proud of me .

 

I'm proud of you, you go buddy!

 

Hi Steve, quite a few US citizens believed that Saddam Hussain was behind the 9/11 attacks on the WTC and Pentagon - and that he was stockpiling a variety of WMDs which he planned to use against his neighbours in the Middle East. Some still believe that to be the case. As for 9/11 there are many unanswered questions such as the collapse of WTC building 7 - and the seemingly controlled demolition of the Twin Towers after the impact of the airliners. It is interesting that we have pursued armed conflict extensively in Iraq and Afghanistan when the vast majority of hijackers were Saudi Arabian - as was Bin Laden himself. What is being best served here - the US/UK national interests or the pusuit of truth and justice? Wouldn't it be more apposite to have captured Bin Laden and put him on trial, or would that option be fraught with difficulties? Perhaps he could just have been sent to Guantanamo instead.....

But let's go back to that fateful year. Just after the 11 September attacks, Congress voted to grant President Bush war authorisation. The resolution passed the Senate 98-0, and passed the House 420-1. The sole vote against the invasion of Afghanistan was cast by California Representative Barbara Lee. Her floor speech in opposition to House joint resolution 64 that 14 September should be required reading:

Whilst I have every sympathy for your compassion for the innocent victims and relatives of 9/11, I can't help but wonder whether some of the relatives of hunderds of thousands of innocent victims who have died at the hands of Allied forces (or any of the numerous private security firms) in Iraq and Afghanistan would share your elation.



Best wishes

Mark

 

Let me make it quite clear that I have no real compassion for Bin Laden or his ilk, whilst I do for all the victims of 9/11, indeed for all innocent people killed by terrorism and the outcomes of terrorism including those in Iraq and Afghanistan who have died at our (Western) hands. However, we are supposed to have a scientific background and as such should question what we are told - particularly by politicians, and examine the potential outcomes.

Thus far, we have been told that Bin Laden's whereabouts were not known by the CIA until very recently. This is despite the most recent suggestion that the Pakistani security informed the CIA in 2009. We were told that Bin Laden 'cowered behind his wife', it is now clear that he did not. It was reported that Bin Laden 'resisted' and was therefore shot. Now we know that Bin Laden had no weapon. An elderly man with no weapon resisted against 40 highly trained special forces marines? How? Is shooting an unarmed man dead not considered murder in civilised countries? Are we in the 'enlightened' West not civilised? Is it not a contravention of every internationally agreed law for one sovereign state to invade the territory of another sovereign state without permission? Are we not supposed to be exemplars of upholding international law?

During the First World War, Republicans in Ireland were revolting against British rule. The leaders were captured and as they were marched through Dublin, the Irish populace spat on them. The British tried them and sentenced them (perfectly legally) to death. The result was that we (the British) created martyrs and the result of that was that terrorism (or armed struggle - it rather depends on which side you happen to be on) increased and Ireland obtained it's independence through violence rather than the peaceful passage which would have happened anyway. That in turn has resulted deep wounds and resentment which hopefully, but only now after 100 years, are healing.

I fear that by this illegal act, a martyr has been created; previously moderate people will become inflamed and further violence will be the result. Terrorists now have the excuse they need "if they can act illegally, then so can we" and more innocent lives will be lost. I can understand the reactions of those who lost their loved ones as a result of violent acts precipitated by Bin Laden, but will this man's death bring them true closure? Some have already stated that it will not. Will we all (the West and Middle East) suffer 100 years of aggression and anguish? To quote John Donne " No man is unto himself an island.....Send not to ask for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee "

With all respect

Bill Liggins

 

Poor Old Ozzy-Fishfood. Four fathoms deep beneath a sky/Of azure blue in silence lies/Our Ozzy in a navy vest/They laid him out in Sunday best// No virgins' kisses touch his cheeks/Where fishes nibble bit by bit/Two holes appear in his head/They were his eyes but now he's dead// That index finger once raised high/It now shows fishes where to bite/And floats around beneath the waves/In still silence between ships' graves/// (c) Jeffrey Jones,2011.

 

So the shot man`s identity was confirmed by DNA analysis !

i) can`t be done that quickly.

ii) it follows they shot a man without being sure of his identity.

They then permanently disposed of the body (evidence).

Suggests they got the wrong man, or he was already dead and they knew it.

 

The other possibility is that it was Bin Laden but that he was not killed but captured and taken by the US forces for rendition and interrogation. Increasingly, the calls are for full disclosure and evidence - without which, the legal case for this action seems untenable, quite separate from the issue of breach of sovereignty. Perhaps a statue of Bin Laden in adjacent Wall Street might be apposite - a lot of people have made a great deal of money at the taxpayers expense over the last decade......

 

For a forum that is supposed to be dedicated to the world of podiatry, and remember our patients can log into this site, I find it quite offensive that we are debating the actions of the USA and Osama Bin Laden.

There are other debate sites all over the www - and they should be used appropriately as I find it unacceptable to be debating such issues on a professional arena. Hardly good for our public reputation don't you think!!

 

Welcome to Podiatry Arena pg2608, where you will find a wide range of topics from creationism, exorcism, foot fetishes etc., in the Break Room - for topics not podiatry related. As far as debating this subject is concerned, I was in London on 7th July 2005 at a Society Council meeting and travelled through Aldgate tube station 10 hours before the tube bombing. I've watched government spending in health and other public services contract substantially over the last decade as our tax revenues have been redirected (or should that be prioritised?) to our military involvment in Iraq and Afghanistan and ever increasing home security to the point that the UK is now, for all intents and purposes, bankrupt. Government policies and actions affect every aspect of our lives and our patient's lives. Some of fellow citizens weren't so fortunate as myself on 7th July 2005 and made their journeys a few hours later and fifty two of them are no longer here with many more scarred for life. If government action potentiates or promotes conflict and suffering, then everyone has a right to debate, civily, the merits or otherwise of said action, don't you think?

 

Hello pg2608 and welcome

I am sorry that you find discussion of Bin Laden offensive and you are as entitled to your opinion as is anyone else. However, if you care to look in the site map, it will direct you to (amongst other areas) the 'break room' which is dedicated to open discussion about anything and everything. Some subjects that I have noticed are the Royal Wedding and sex before public speaking.

This is an international site and personally, I find it interesting and enlightening to note the reactions of my colleagues around the world, on a diversity of subjects. You will have noted on my posting concerning the subject at hand that I noted that we share a scientific background and should therefore ask questions. Where better to find answers than on a site we share with colleagues? Who better to question our own pre-determined positions and opinions than our own colleagues? How better than to debate and discuss matters with a group of intelligent people with whom we have something in common?

Thanks Craig, and please never remove the break room. Finally pg2608, you will note that the vast majority of people who put their views forward on this site do so over their own names. You might consider offering the same courtesy to your colleagues, which although not obligatory, would, I am sure, be seen in terms of strengthening your argument.

All the best

Bill Liggins

 

PG...I find it offensive that you chose to be critical of Podiatry Arena in your very FIRST
post.

If you read the rules, you will find that you must contribute 50 posts that enlighten the reader before you are allowed to write a post critical of this forum.

Steven

 

Lmao!!

 

I completely agree with the above sentiments. We must have absolute respect for the process of law, where it is tested in an independent court, to prove guilt and administer justice as and when proven or dispose of otherwise. It is a principle that we demand of others and to which we must uphold ourselves otherwise we have nothing but anarchy and barbarism and a concomitant increase in "terrorism". Three thousand people innocent people died in 9/11 - how many innocent people have died in Iraq and Afghanistan as a result of our response?

Whilst I have, like Bill, no sympathy whatsoever with the actions of Islamists like Bin Laden, I do have some sympathy with his views regarding the foreign policy of Western countries like the USA and UK and their support and involvement with nefarious regimes in the Middle East - like Saudi Arabia, Israel, Iraq (previous to their invasion of Kuwait) and Libya (before Gaddafi became unfashionable). It is because of our promotion of such policies that such unrest and discontent has flourished. What we, in the West, failed to do after 9/11, is to examine the reasons that led thirty odd men to hijack and fly airliners into buildings in the first place - leaving out the fanatical religious fervour that naturally inflamed the circumstance. What is it that led them down such a desperate path - where death and the slaughter of fellow human beings, was preferable to living out their natural lives in an ordinary way? If we are truly serious about eliminating terrorism, we owe it to ourselves and future generations to consider the causes of such hatred and division, otherwise we risk a continuation of the deadly cycle we have become part of. Have we learned nothing from the last decade?

Kindest

Mark

 

Possibly not.

You can't stop malaria by killing mosquitoes. You stop malaria by draining the swamps so the mosquitoes don't breed. I fear that the events of the last decade have done little to soften the view of the Islamic world toward the west and have created the perfect environment to breed extremism.

If the roles were reversed, if Al queda had gotten a wet team into the US or the UK and assassinated the PM or the president, would it make the rest of us more or less inclined to strike back at al queada?

 

One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter

Infact Bin Ladin has been both to the US over his life.

Freedom fighter backed by the US 1st then most wanted Terrorist of the USA and western world later.

 

Happens a lot. Mubarak, Gafaffi, and Saddam Hussein to name a few. All have had the support of the west at some point.

Mark said it well. Not "fashionable" any longer.

 

We know best, we mean well, we're bigger than you, therefore, whatever we do is ok.

Will the West never learn ?

We have this simplistic view that there are only one set of values and one way of assessing situations. We try to impose our ways on societies at quite different stages of development; then wonder why they react.

I'm trying to think of a time when we moved in on another community, when we thought there was a chance of getting a 'bloody nose'.
We confuse might with right !

 

Hi All
Interesting posts but for my two pen'th worth I think it is too easy to blame all the world's ills on the West and it's policies although I know that they have played a part in developing and sustaining many of the regimes now hitting the headlines.
Many countries in the Middle East have a long history of authoritarian governments with pervasive secret police forces used to suppress any dissent. I don't think there is a single true democracy in the Middle East.
Education, especially for women is often poor and in many countries literacy rates are extremely low. Amongst the elites in many of these countries corruption and economic mismanagement is gross and endemic leaving large sections of the population living in poverty with poor or non-existent infrastructures including healthcare ( the maternal mortality rates in Afghanistan are appalling with 1 in 9 women dying) . There is no freedom of speech or the press with all information controlled by governments concerned.
I could go on but I feel that maybe the West has become the scapegoat and the universal ` bad guy`and maybe some of the problem lies within these countries and the frustration that ordinary people feel with their own governments.

Cheers

Deborah
Deborah

 

Goodaye Deborah.
Not all the world's ills, but certainly regarding O. bin Laden type characters.

Iran had a democracy back in 1953, but Britain didn't like the Mossadegh? government reclaiming their oil (which Britain had been ripping off) so appealed to the USA (think it was Truman's govt) and yes the CIA organised and nurtured an overthrow of this democratic government and reinstalled the Shah and helped train the Savak (Shah's secret police) (google that one! for their record),
all the best, mark

 

Hi Deborah

Don't think anyone can argue with the above - and there are many altruistic philanthropic people who have made significant contributions to the peoples in developing nations, including the Middle East. Rather it is the actions and policies of successive governments who act in our "national interests" which more oft than not means their own affiliated as opposed to representative interests that's the issue.