BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 May 11 - 05:48 AM

Glad you had a nice day yesterday Jim.
The weather was not so good here, but we have been very lucky in recent weeks.

I made my comment 24 hours after your early posts yesterday morning.
You did post again during the day, but not to make any contribution to the debate.
Just a snipe at me, and a refusal again to list those countries you referred to earlier.

No contribution in your last post either.

Have you given up?

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 May 11 - 07:03 AM

You typed more words than I did yesterday Jim.
Get a life mate.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Charley Noble
Date: 08 May 11 - 12:07 PM

Richard-

The US claims that its information came from "enhanced interrogation"

A more correct phrasing of what you've posted above would be that there's an active debate within the US of whether any information derived form "enhanced interrogation" was useful or critical. It seems that the alias of the courier did first come from "enhanced interrogation" but that name was meaningless until other prisoners were interviewed with more conventional interrogation techniques and provided corroboration and more detail. Linking the courier to a phone call was the next step and then tracking him to Bin Laden's hide-a-way was the final piece in the puzzle.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Stringsinger
Date: 08 May 11 - 12:41 PM

ObL targeted assassination was Obama's hail mary pass to get re-elected. "Congress? He don't need no stinkin' Congress!"

Does it matter? If you think so, you're kidding yourself. Zawarhiri is still out there to become another political football.

The idea that ObL was really behind 911 is becoming increasingly more ludicrous, the more information out there is available.

No one has completely debunked a "conspiracy theory" about 911. There just isn't enough information available to the public.

Forget transparency in government.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 08 May 11 - 12:53 PM

"ObL targeted assassination was Obama's hail mary pass to get re-elected."

I think similarly, that it was a primarily political decision rather than a pragmatic one.

"Does it matter? If you think so, you're kidding yourself. Zawarhiri is still out there to become another political football."

Yes..

"The idea that ObL was really behind 911 is becoming increasingly more ludicrous, the more information out there is available.
No one has completely debunked a "conspiracy theory" about 911."

You don't have to be a 'conspiracy theorist' to suspect that in the absence of any other takers Bin Laden may well have falsely claimed the attack, not because he actually masterminded it, but instead for purposes of enhancing his prestige.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 08 May 11 - 12:57 PM

On the BBC news, did I just see a video of Bin Laden watching himself on TV???...I have strong doubts...

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 08 May 11 - 01:11 PM

Stringsinger: "ObL targeted assassination was Obama's hail mary pass to get re-elected. "Congress? He don't need no stinkin' Congress!"

I pretty much agree with you on that one! I've always distrusted him, from the beginning, as I'm sure my previous posts for the last two-three years would attest to. After the election I layed off of him for a years, as voluntarily promised Amos, and to give the guy room for a chance to do whatever he was going to do...and for the FIRST time, since he's been President, he actually went through the motions, of acting Presidential...and as soon as this bump in the polls go down, I imagine he'll release the photos, just to 'remind' people how 'wonderful' he is.
Personally, I think he is a schill for the bankers, with an 'almost' black face, to appeal to the left/liberals, but in fact, he is just a continuation of Bush/Clinton/Bush/Ford/Kissinger/Carter regimes..with NO slack in between!...each 'appealing' to the 'left' or 'right' ON THE SURFACE, but the main policies, which are ripping off the citizens, of their freedom, liberty, money, property, rights and warring foreign countries, for the highest bidding corporate 'special interests' has NOT changed!..Therefore, the hard sell to the American public!
Also, you possibly are correct about 911, and you can add the Oklahoma City federal building bombing, in with that..(remember the middle eastern guy getting out of the truck, right before the blast, as reported by several witnesses, and caught on camera?).
Sooner or later, all the truth may come out, but meanwhile, the country pretty much applauds Obama for OBL....but looks the other way for Waco!
Still, that being said, my heart goes out for all the innocent victims, who lost their families, or loved ones during this whole charade.
As far as OBL, it appears that the recalcitrant terrorist was at it, all the way to the end, and he was just stopped, in the course of it. Only his supporters, and sympathizers are doing the bitching. Makes you wonder, huh?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Stringsinger
Date: 08 May 11 - 02:07 PM

Guests,I agree and as an addition,, my heart goes out to all of the Iraqis and Afghans who George Bush killed during his "terrist" assaults. Colin Powell's graphs said it all. Weapons of Mass Delusion.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 08 May 11 - 02:54 PM

Surely, Charlie, the official line is: "The US claims that its information came from "enhanced interrogation"".

Keith, Pakistan has officially voiced its concern. It can hardly do more if it still wants its aid.

"The incursion is legal if for national self defence." - Hmm, funny, what about the Graf Spee?

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 08 May 11 - 03:04 PM

"Colin Powell's graphs said it all. Weapons of Mass Delusion."

I was aware of the shoddy case of the plagiarised and 'sexed-up' Phd thesis that our intelligence service used to push the war, I wasn't aware until just now of the shoddy case of the CIA (ab)using Powell by briefing him with material gathered from sources already known to be unreliable.
The more you hear about this stuff, the more attractive the prospect of Iraqui troops swooping in on their own midnight raid to assassinate Bush & Blair becomes.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: artbrooks
Date: 08 May 11 - 03:23 PM

Just because I'm always interested in what other peoples' media are reporting, exactly what "official" source said that the information on Osama's location came from "enhanced interrogation"?

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: GUEST,Lighter
Date: 08 May 11 - 03:39 PM

Somehow I don't agree that the most complicated, most sinister explanations of events are most likely to be correct.

Obama is not Stalin.

Years ago I saw Oliver Stone's paranoid-fantasy flick JFK in the theater. In one scene, an unknown somebody secretly places a bullet on JFK's stretcher. The little old lady next to me shouted out, "Those sons of bitches!" She believed it because she saw it in a movie.

If anyone doubts the Warren Commission (and I know you do), I recommend Vincent Bugliosi's exhaustive book on the subject. Bugliosi is the former prosecutor who secured convictions for Charles Manson and company. A later book strongly indicted George W. Bush for an unnecessary invasion of Iraq.

Bugliosi concludes, among many other things, that Stone's film is baloney.

But Bugliosi could be part of the conspiracy too, and Manson might be innocent. Think about it. The anti-Bush book would then be part of Bugliosi's cover, perhaps written to Obama's order.

And I can't prove it wasn't, either.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 08 May 11 - 04:01 PM

I saw it discussed on BBC's Question Time, though I don't recall if any official source for the information was cited then. Possibly not.

Otherwise, an article in The Telegraph here CIA Admits Waterboarding Yeilded Vital Information goes into greater detail. According to Leon Panetta (director of the CIA) both so-called "enhanced" and other more conventional methods contributed to the full picture. I hear there has been some criticism of the Obama administration's seeming coyness about divulging this detail of the story, particularly from those who support the use of such methods.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: GUEST,Lighter
Date: 08 May 11 - 04:17 PM

Just as a point of interest, Obama outlawed waterboarding almost as soon as he took office in 2009.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 08 May 11 - 04:27 PM

"Obama outlawed waterboarding"

I believe the relevant information gleaned by such methods, was about ten years old. Clearly there is a contingent of commentators who wish to ensure that "credit" for Bin Laden's elimination, goes to the prior Bush administration.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 May 11 - 04:48 PM

Richard, I have acknowledged that Pakistan expressed "concern"
That is not challenging the legality of the incursion.
Their concern was that, not having been informed, there could have been an incident.
Reasonable concern I suppose.

Richard, are you not aware that national self defence can justify an incursion without consent?
That is what you would have to argue against.
Some individuals do, but no country or organisation so far.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 May 11 - 04:53 PM

Re 9/11 conspiracy.
I do not believe it, but I accept that cleverer people than me do.

I followed all the arguments and counterarguments, but that was before the administration changed.

What are the theories about the Democrats?
Were they in on it from the start?

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 08 May 11 - 05:23 PM

Keith, what is the latter part of your post timed at 04:48 trying to say?

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Don Firth
Date: 08 May 11 - 05:42 PM

I can't speak for Keith, but I believe he's talking about the stipulations of International Law. Rulings of the World Court in The Hague. Among other things, after WWI and as a result of the fact that it was totally uncontrollable once released, it outlawed the use of poison gas, which is why it was NOT used in WWII.

You might want to acquaint yourself with that body of law.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: GUEST,Lighter
Date: 08 May 11 - 06:40 PM

Actually, the Japanese often used poison gas against the Chinese in WWII.

The Chinese didn't have any to strike back with. The Japanese never used it against the western Allies, who did. One reason that it wasn't used in Europe is that both sides had it. If anybody had thought that the use of gas, lawful or not, would have given them a decisive advantage, they'd have used it.

More than one treaty banned the use of poison gas after WWI, but industrial nations kept right on developing and manufacturing them for decades - just in case.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 08 May 11 - 07:29 PM

""Jim, we have thousands of US service men and women here all the time!
I used to train with them back in the Cold War.
We were very grateful to have them with us in those dark days.
All of which means nothing to you.
Marxist?
Trot?""

So that's where you picked up your biased ideas.

Pity you didn't notice that they were here by agreement between the US and UK governments.

Pillock?

Prat?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Don Firth
Date: 08 May 11 - 07:58 PM

By the way, I almost missed this many posts back.

Jim:   "Established as a fact years ago Don - by an Irish govenment that not only has refused to inspect the planes, as they have a right to do, but who have said they were not prepared to interfere in the war against terrorism."

Which is to say, the planes were NOT inspected. So what kind of cargo they may or may not have been carrying is NOT KNOWN. So the idea that they were transporting people for "extraordinary rendition" is merely speculation.

Not a "fact" at all!

V-e-e-e-e-ery interesting. . . .

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 08 May 11 - 08:09 PM

""The only people I see disagreeing are this sites usual malcontents and other terrorists like Hamas that they side with.""

Bobad you are a complete arse, and your agenda is both transparent and reprehensible.

Nobody here is siding with terrorists, and nobody here is the least bit sorry that ObL is dead.

The bone of contention is the way in which the US government rides roughshod over the sovereignty of enemies and friends alike. You obviously support their attitude as you do the very similar arrogance of the Israeli government.

As a citizen of one of the countries most likely to take the brunt of any retaliatory action, I object to the way in which the US handled the affair, and to their insanely self congratulatory insistence that they have made the world a safer place.

It might look that way sitting 4000 miles away from the source of such action, but unlike our resident cold war hero, many in the UK will feel that they stand right in the line of fire from both sides and won't be any too sure which represents the greater danger.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 08 May 11 - 08:18 PM

""But your knee-jerk idea that Americans in general, or me personally, totally approve of the whole operation, especially the possibility of the use of (and call it what it is!) torture, are insulting, offensive, holier-than-thou, and blatant evidence of rank prejudice.""

Your case might be quite a strong one Don, if you ignore the television coverage of all those non political Americans dancing in the streets.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: bobad
Date: 08 May 11 - 08:18 PM

"Nobody here is siding with terrorists"

The "usual malcontents" have defended the actions of Hamas in attacking Israel, you can look it up. As for calling me an arse....well, that doesn't surprise me.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: bobad
Date: 08 May 11 - 08:55 PM

President Obama on 60 Minutes:

"As nervous as I was about this whole process, the one thing I didn't lose sleep over was the possibility of taking bin Laden out," Obama said. "Justice was done. And I think that anyone who would question that the perpetrator of mass murder on American soil didn't deserve what he got needs to have their head examined."

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 08 May 11 - 09:32 PM

Are you listening, Bobad? It's not whether ObL deserved to die. It's whether the operation and his killing were LEGAL.

Oh, and if Keith were to be right that self defence legally justifies incursion, then that would be a perfect answer to the claim that Hamas are terrorists.

Oh, and surely Obama, former editor of the Harvard law review realises that no court of competent jurisdiction had ever convicted ObL of murder. He's just found an approach that plays well to the rednecks. The law of the Wild West.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 08 May 11 - 09:44 PM

Don Firth, the USA at present refuses to recognise the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice (unless it wants to) or the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court at all.

Dual standard?

Or were you referring to something else?

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: artbrooks
Date: 08 May 11 - 09:45 PM

It is now slightly more than 72 hours since I originally said the following:

I would be very interested in seeing a practical scenario for the peaceful capture of Osama from some of those who believe that what actually happened violated some "rule of law".

Anyone care to take it on?

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: bobad
Date: 08 May 11 - 09:49 PM

Oh, I'm listening alright, to a lot more eminent legal mind than yours, contrary to what you might think, and the vast majority of them are of the opinion that it was legal.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: GUEST,Lighter
Date: 08 May 11 - 09:53 PM

Just as a point of interest, the United States is a legally constituted government recognized as a nation by every other nation on earth. So is Pakistan.

Hamas is a political party.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 May 11 - 01:18 AM

Richard, national self defence could justify an incursion such as this one, but not random acts of terror against a civilian population as practiced by Hamas.

Don T, was I wrong volunteer to stand with the British Army alongside our US allies, against the might of the Warsaw Pact's armoured divisions?

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Wotcha
Date: 09 May 11 - 02:08 AM

OBL put himself into combat on 9/11 so it did not matter whether he was picking his nose, brandishing a weapon, or sleeping when he was shot by a service member nearly 10 years later. For this op it appears he was declared a combatant (along with others in his entourage) by the highest national authority, therefore he could be targeted under the ROE being used. This is not assassination but a lawful military action. This was not a civilian law enforcement matter but an extraordinary military action, therefore neither police rules on self defense nor arrest warrants applied. Naturally every op has unintended consequences but that's why Obama is paid to be the "decider" ...

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 09 May 11 - 02:21 AM

"scenario for the peaceful capture of Osama"

As said I'm no military expert. However I'm sure that there are those of us here, who would have preferred it if those who are military experts could have done so, and that there had been a proper trial rather than an execution.

By the by, I wonder how many US posters here are aware of the Wiki leaked information (from US intelligence) which threatened a nuclear attack in Europe if Bin Laden were to be killed in the way that he just has been?

I mention that not in support of terrorists, but just as a reminder to those here angered by outsiders expressing concerns over aspects of this operation, that US military actions can and do have implications for the rest of the world.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 May 11 - 02:50 AM

No-one could take that threat seriously Lively.
They hated us enough already.
You can't believe they were holding back on any attacks they could make.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 May 11 - 03:22 AM

Just in case there is any doubt about the Pakistani government's attitude to the incursion into its territory.
Plan B, from a Sunday Times report into the raid:
".... if bin Laden had tried to escape before the Seals arrived a 2,000lb bomb would have been dropped on the compound, obliterating it." - and no doubt, a considerable number of Pakistani citizens along with it - I'm sure they were as happy to welcome the troops as some would suggest in such circumstances!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 09 May 11 - 03:31 AM

Well, Bobad, you are not conveying that you are so listening. The points you seek to make here are as to practicality not legality or the gut-level argument of "well he deserved it". Maybe he did, but hard cases make bad law.

Keith: your point to Don is irrelevant. I expect he will tell you why.

I am still not clear what your point I queried above was and should be grateful if you would clarify.

I do not think I agree with your assertion that "self defence" could not apply to attacks by Hamas or Hezbollah. Most rocket attacks by them for example, it seems to me, are targeted as accurately as the technology they can muster enables. But further, the US courts have held that the IRA were freedom fighters and political prisoners (InOBU gave details some years ago on here) and I do not see grounds for a more favourable view of the IRA than of Hamas or Hezbollah.

Moreover, if the USA were to recognise international law (see my comments above) as far as I know the determination under international law that a person was an unlawful combatant requires to have been made by a court of competent jurisdiction, and there was no such determination.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 May 11 - 04:00 AM

Richard, it is not my assertion, it is the position taken by the US government.

"Reinhard Heydrich was one of the key architects of Hitler's genocide against the Jews.

In 1941, the British Special Operations Executive (SOE) was authorised by Winston Churchill to assassinate high-ranking Nazis wherever they could be found.
In 1942, two of the many Czech citizens whom the SOE had trained to implement this strategy blew up the car carrying Heydrich to his office in Prague. He died a week later from infection following his injuries.

If that had taken place today, we would most likely find the Archbishop of Canterbury fretting 'justice didn't seem to be done', Paddy Ashdown tut-tutting that the rule of law did not condone 'non- judicial execution', and human rights lawyers seeking to arrest Churchill for war crimes"

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 May 11 - 04:02 AM

Richard, Hamas' rockets are indiscriminate.
Lack of better technology does not excuse their use.
Their use is an act of terror.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 09 May 11 - 04:14 AM

"No-one could take that threat seriously Lively."

Perhaps not, I really wouldn't know the truth of the matter.

All I know is what I have read, and that is that one week prior to Bin Laden's killing, Wikileaks released materials indicating that certain information had been gleaned by US intelligence pertaining to a nuclear threat supposedly located in Europe - by which one might well suppose London.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 May 11 - 04:51 AM

Yes, I read that too.
I do not believe they would hold it back in case OBL was taken.
Maybe save it for an important occasion, e.g. royal wedding or 9/11 anniversary.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 May 11 - 05:24 AM

"".... if bin Laden had tried to escape before the Seals arrived a 2,000lb bomb would have been dropped on the compound, obliterating it." - and no doubt, a considerable number of Pakistani citizens along with it - I'm sure they were as happy to welcome the troops as some would suggest in such circumstances!!"

There were about 20 people in the compound.
No one in nearby buildings would have been harmed.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 09 May 11 - 05:42 AM

Saw the abovementioned video again and it does indeed seem Bin Laden had himself filmed watching TV - probably produced to prove, at some stage, he was alive.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: GUEST,Peter Laban
Date: 09 May 11 - 05:51 AM

Or maybe just the wife or one of the children messing about with the camcorder?

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 09 May 11 - 06:16 AM

Either way, PL, I suppose the main issue is could/should they have taken him as prisoner.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 May 11 - 06:16 AM

"No one in nearby buildings would have been harmed. "
Oh - only 20 - that's all right then!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 May 11 - 06:39 AM

What can you do when fighters surround themselves with civilians including children.
The SEALS did well to spare all the children and most of the adults (who all knew their host).

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 May 11 - 06:59 AM

"What can you do when fighters surround themselves with civilians including children."
You can act on the basis that there are non-combatants in the area - you do not kill hostages - we've been here before with you.
It was never necessary to kill bin Laden and it would have been a far greater diplomatic victory - not to mention justice seen to be done, had he been taken and tried.
The argument that hostages might have been taken to free him is far outweighed by the threat of reprisals yet to come for his death.
Your arrogant assumption that only those in the compound would heve been killed doesn't even hold water - it would depend where the bomb landed, and an assuption that a 2,000lb bomb would restrict damage to within a confined area is bloody nonsense.
This was an act of revenge with no consideration of how many would be killed, and has proved to be an utter diplomatic shambles, comparable only with the shootout at the OK Corral.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 May 11 - 07:26 AM

30 000 Pakistanis killed already by Al Qaeda and Taleban.

The Mk84 2000lb bomb is highly accurate and has a danger zone of 315m.
No buildings were that close to the compound.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 May 11 - 07:29 AM

the JDAM system will provide a minimum weapon accuracy CEP of 13 meters or less when a GPS signal is available, though Boeing and the Air Forces report less than 10 meters CEP in testing. If the GPS signal is jammed or lost, the JDAM can still achieve a 30 meter CEP or less for free flight times up to 100 seconds