BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: bobad
Date: 15 May 11 - 08:18 AM

Family Guy segment on Osama Bin Laden in which Stewie takes on the Sheik (the man, not the condom).

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: bobad
Date: 15 May 11 - 06:28 AM

Good riddance....you won't be missed.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 15 May 11 - 06:20 AM

""Don T., where and when did I, specifically, refer to you, specifically, as a "terrorist sympathizer?""

Never claimed you did!

If you go back to my first post mentioning the way you and Keith are misrepresenting I clearly said "myself (and others who disagree with you)".

In the past, I have generally found myself on the same side as you in most debates, but in this one I have been disappointed in the extreme with the way that our misgivings have been used to brand us as terrorist sympathisers.

However, since there is no point trying to debate with anyone who persists in deliberately distorting what I say, I will simply leave (and I don't come back again, when I say that).

I wish you joy of your "victory", and I genuinely hope that it will prove worth the cost (only Pakistani lives.......SO FAR!)

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Teribus
Date: 15 May 11 - 05:33 AM

Ahh but Keith all those attacks were carried out by the Taleban in retaliation for the US thinking about killing Osama bin Laden.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 15 May 11 - 05:04 AM

"Well, Charley, I look at the contributors to the thread and I believe they'd have a major 1,000 post fight over whether beige is a real color, only about 97% will spell it "colour". Mudcat Traveling Wrecking Crew."

I don't know how many US posters here have expressed concerns about this action, but there were quite a number of more critical US based posters at the outset I believe. Currently there do seem to be a number of non US / international posters - principally from Canada and the UK it seems, who have are more critical than most of the US posters currently posting.

I haven't read any international media coverage, but it would be interesting to find out - if or how - media analysis in different countries internationally, differed from that of mainstream US media coverage in terms of how positively or negatively, the mission has been represented.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 May 11 - 04:28 AM

After a double suicide bomb killed 80 people in Pakistan on Friday here is a timeline of major extremist attacks carried out in the country in the last five years.


By Laura Roberts 10:31AM BST 13 May 2011
April 1, 2011: At least 41 people were killed in twin suicide bomb attacks at the Sufi shrine in Dera Ghazi Khan district, in Pakistan's central province of Punjab, as worshippers gathered for a festival. The Taliban claimed responsibility.


March 31, 2011: At least 13 people were killed in a suicide bomb attack on the leader of one of Pakistan's most influential Islamic parties and a long–standing ally of the Afghan Taliban movement. It was the second suicide bomb attack on the leader of Jamiat Ulema–i–Islam in two days. Twelve people were killed when a suicide bomber on a motorbike attacked a crowd in Swabi waiting for Mr Rehman to address them.


November 5, 2010: A suicide bomber killed 68 people at a mosque in the northwest area of Darra Adam Khel. Hours later, grenades thrown into a second mosque, near Peshawar, killed at least two people.


October 2010: 25 people were killed in a blast at a shrine in Punjab province. Another attack at a Karachi shrine two weeks earlier killed nine and was claimed by the Taliban.


July 10, 2010: Double suicide bombing kills 102 people in village of Kakaghund in northwestern Pakistan.


April 5, 2010: Taliban fighters using rocket-propelled grenades, car bombs and suicide vests tried to storm the United States consulate in Pakistan's North West Frontier Province. Five security guards were among seven people killed during the raid in Peshawar. Several explosions in the area caused buildings to collapse.

Enough.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Teribus
Date: 15 May 11 - 03:24 AM

Don(Wyziwyg)T - Date: 14 May 11 - 05:55 PM

Missed the points I made entirely

"the action of a vigilante is:

1: Totally unauthorised, completely unofficial.

2: The independent action of a private individual or a small group of like minded private individuals who have no official standing.

So according to Don(Wyziwyg)T:

- The US Navy Seal Team that killed bin Laden were unauthorised and had no official status - which we all know and appreciate is complete and utter bullshit

- The raid carried out by the US NAvy SEAL Team was undertaken entirely off their own bat - Again which we all know and appreciate is complete and utter bullshit

As to this heinous crime of the forces of one country operating in another? Extremely old and accepted principle originally known as the right of "Hot Trod" along the Anglo-Scottish Border, in modern times it became known as the right to exercise "Hot Pursuit". There apparently was a secret agreement between the US and Pakistani Governments that allowed the US to undertake this mission with respect to bin Laden and the leadership of Al-Qaeda. The desirability and necessity of such an agreement from the point of view of both parties should be blatantly obvious to all. Khalid Sheikh Muhammad after all was captured by the Pakistani ISI and handed over to the Americans - Why? As proof of their commitment? No way could they do the same with Osama bin Laden the uproar would have been deafening, no wonder they left it to the "infidel" Americans, much more acceptable solution to the problem.

More complete and utter bullshit from Don T:
"A very pragmatic point of view Jeri, but the killings have started, and whatever Bobad thinks (and his record is far from unbiased), the fact that they were Pakistani deaths doesn't mean they can simply be written off as irrelevant."

Ah so the killings have just started have they?? What the hell do you think that the Tehrik-i-Taliban (Pakistani Taleban) have been doing for the last two or three years? Mullah Muhammad Omar the leader of the Quetta Shura and the Afghan Taleban has actually pleaded with the Tehrik-i-Taliban to stop attacks inside Pakistan because ultimately 150 million non-Pashtun Pakistani's are going to get fed up with bombs going off in market places and shopping centres, put two and two together and turn on the Taleban and they will not distinguish between the Pakistani and Afghan varieties. But they, the TTP, have studiously ignored him - so much for solidarity.

Not surprising really as the Pakistani Government came to an agreement with the Pakistan Taliban over Swat Province which allowed Talib contol over this area under Sharia law but it required the Pakistani Taliban to disarm - which of course they never did. Shortly after moving into Swat the Pakistani Taliban then turned their attention to the neighbouring Buner Province and that was the straw that broke the camel's back as far as the Pakistani Government was concerned. The Pakistani Border Police and Army conducted a full scale military attack on the Taliban in Buner, in Swat and in South Waziristan. And that Don(Wyziwyg)T is why the TTP carry out suicide bombing attacks in Pakistan - It has got nothing whatsoever to do with Osama bin Laden - but convenient excuse for propaganda purposes though. Bigger flare up over cartoons and burning books.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 May 11 - 03:24 AM

The Pakistan bombs are just the latest in a series that have been going on in Pakistan for years.
Each bomb is justified by the bombers as a reprisal for some recent actions by Pakistan.
If ObL had not been killed some other justification would have been given for this week's bombs.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 14 May 11 - 11:11 PM

Up until a year ago I certainly would have agreed with many here on this thread. A visit a while back from good friend of my youth changed my attitude regarding revenge and justice. This friend happens to be a criminal lawyer. During his visit we had a debate regarding justice and revenge (relative to violent criminals) that continued late into the evening. I eventually understood his platform of reasoning … simply put, no matter how much we are repulsed by such crimes, by not adhering to the right of the accused to have his day in court no matter what the cost to taxpayers we are no different to these perpetrators of such hideous crimes … This same reasoning can be applied to international humanitarian law that we in the western world have drafted and believe we adhere to.

I should also mention this friend of mine is also a child of holocaust survivors who themselves suffered horrifically during there incarceration at Auschwitz.

Anyway ... that's my 2 cents worth to this issue for what it's worth. Now, go on and continure your arguments.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: gnu
Date: 14 May 11 - 09:48 PM

I didn't click sIx. Binny didn't have any rights. Binny took it twixt the lookers with his eyes wide open.... or shut... depending on how you view it.

Course, I really don't think he's dead. He and Sadman are sipping mints on an island paradise with vestal virgins, playing checkers and having a laugh, wondering when Hosni and Moe will show up so they can play bridge.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: GUEST,Lighter
Date: 14 May 11 - 09:02 PM

It seems to me that the only rights that a terrorist has is to renounce terrorism, surrender peaceably, confess guilt or else plead his case in court, and exhort his associates to do the same.

Bin Laden chose not to exercise those rights. No one could do it for him.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 14 May 11 - 08:44 PM

An interesting article from Spiegel, in case anyone is interested. Of course it will be greatly contested in this thread. But, what the hell, I have to agree somewhat.

Terrorists Have Rights Too

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Don Firth
Date: 14 May 11 - 08:00 PM

You didn't read that article I posted, did you, Richard?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 14 May 11 - 07:50 PM

Since DonT is a conservative and I am not it grieves me to have to say this, but he needs no assistance on this thread on the last few posts and is obviously right.

We are concerned at the legality of US action in this.

We are even more concerned that the US tries to declare itself judge as to what is legal in this.

Is it Dietrich Bonhoeffer I should be citing?

I told you so.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Don Firth
Date: 14 May 11 - 07:42 PM

". . . both you and Don Firth continued to ignore that and to categorise me as a terrorist sympathiser."

Don T., where and when did I, specifically, refer to you, specifically, as a "terrorist sympathizer?"

Cite the post (date and time) in which I allegedly said this.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: andrew e
Date: 14 May 11 - 07:11 PM

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=26287

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: bobad
Date: 14 May 11 - 06:41 PM

DonT is a liar!

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Jeri
Date: 14 May 11 - 06:31 PM

800

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 14 May 11 - 06:05 PM

""If we'd had him stand trial, he'd wind up dead too, but there would have been a whole lot of stuff in between, possibly including more deaths and things going "boom". And terrorist killings of innocents of another country are NOT simple crimes.""

A very pragmatic point of view Jeri, but the killings have started, and whatever Bobad thinks (and his record is far from unbiased), the fact that they were Pakistani deaths doesn't mean they can simply be written off as irrelevant.

And riding roughshod over the sovereignty of another country is NOT a simple crime.

In terms of the effect on other allies who were neither informed nor consulted, I can only hope that the inevitable retaliation will be selectively targetted.

I'm sorry, but that to me seems only fair.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 14 May 11 - 05:55 PM

""3: The people who killed bin Laden were members of the US Navy SEALS, a duly constituted, recognised and fully authorised branch of the armed forces of the United States of America.""

But not a duly constituted, recognised and fully authorised branch of the armed forces of the country in which they were operating, (in case you've forgotten) Pakistan.

""4: The people who killed bin Laden were acting under orders from their Commander-in-Chief, who personally authorised this mission.""

I see, you are saying that this Commander-in-Chief has some officially authorised role in the government of the Sovereign State of Pakistan, which permits him to carry out military actions within its borders. Isn't he a bit stretched running two countries so far apart?

""No grounds whatsoever could be established to substantiate calling this the act of a "vigilante", or could describe it as an example of "vigilantism".""

If there is an internationally established maximum size for a group whose activities can be described as vigilantism, perhaps you would direct me to the relevant statute? Authorisation has yet to be tested, let alone proved.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: gnu
Date: 14 May 11 - 05:43 PM

999... "2) If I knew how to reach the SEALs who killed him I`d send a box of chocolates"

If you do "reach" them, I'll add a box of bullets.

Allah bless the SEALs.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 14 May 11 - 05:34 PM

""You are also the only person to have used the word "fucking" or anything like it on this thread.""

Not so! There have been a fair number of epithets produced in the course of this thread, and by several posters other than myself.

I was unaware that you had been promoted to the lofty position of profanity watchdog.

However, although I am not obliged to account to you for either my words or my actions, I will point out that after having stated numerous times that I had no sympathy for ObL and was pleased that he was dead, both you and Don Firth continued to ignore that and to categorise me as a terrorist sympathiser.

I decided to emphasise the point by using the F word, which I hardly ever use (please note that I have used the euphemistic form in deference to your delicate sensibilities), but I might as well not have bothered, since the only part of "I'M F**KING GLAD HE'S DEAD!" that you actually saw was the F word.

Which word, incidentally, was not even directed at you or Don Firth, but an adjective qualifying my feelings about his death.

It was established long ago that bad language on this forum would not be barred or moderated except in terms of a direct attack, and Joe Offer has also indicated his abiding dislike of euphemisms.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Teribus
Date: 14 May 11 - 05:22 PM

I. Was the US raid justifiable?
   A. Legally? YES
   B. Morally? YES
   C. Tactically? YES

II. Was the Taliban's suicide bombing in Pakistan justifiable?
   A. Legally? NO
   B. Morally? NO
   C. Tactically? NO

The Taleban have tried to peddle the lie that they had no connection with Al-Qaeda or bin Laden so why are THEY avenging him? We have only THEIR word for it that this bombing wasn't an operation planned weeks ago. The Taleban's (Pakistani Taleban we are talking about here right?) fight is with the Pakistani Government, their aim is to destabilise the Pakistani Government and they have been attacking similar targets in Pakistan ever since the Pakistani Army moved against them in Buner and Swat Provinces.

III. Does the US bear any responsibility for the Taliban bombings?
   A. Legally? NO
   B. Morally? NO
   C. Tactically? NO

The reason the Pakistani Taleban attack targets inside Pakistan has got nothing to do with Al-Qaeda or bin Laden or Afghanistan.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 14 May 11 - 02:34 PM

The bastard is dead, good riddance. Thanks to the U. S. for taking him out without loss of life outside his compound.
There are a few more who should be targeted-

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Jeri
Date: 14 May 11 - 01:31 PM

Er... Lighter? I think your broad outline will wind up (pun accidental) covering the next 100 or so threads.

A. It's all W's fault.
B. The US is capable, and willing (under the right direction--see 'A.') to do really stupid things just because we can.
   (1.) I believe the war in Iran is one of those things, and probably the war in Afghanistan. BUT I lack the intelligence (military info--stop laughing) to know for sure.
   (2.) I believe killing O/UBL is NOT one of those things. I think farting around and starting a bunch of wars instead of going after O/UBL IS one. (See 'A.')

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: GUEST,Lighter
Date: 14 May 11 - 12:28 PM

Now, now, lads - let's not lose sight of the central issues of this, er, "discussion."

I've organized and outlined them for you:

I. Was the US raid justifiable?
   A. Legally?
   B. Morally?
   C. Tactically?

II. Was the Taliban's suicide bombing in Pakistan justifiable?
   A. Legally?
   B. Morally?
   C. Tactically?

III. Does the US bear any responsibility for the Taliban bombings?
   A. Legally?
   B. Morally?
   C. Tactically?

Also, when will someone raise the possibility that the "Taliban" bombings were a false-flag operation actually carried out by somebody else? I can conceive of a number of possible perpetrators and motives, all very devious and therefore more likely than the media story, but I'll let you deal with that issue on your own.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Jeri
Date: 14 May 11 - 12:15 PM

Well, Charley, I look at the contributors to the thread and I believe they'd have a major 1,000 post fight over whether beige is a real color, only about 97% will spell it "colour". Mudcat Traveling Wrecking Crew. But everybody's still pals at the end, and ready to carry it on somewhere else, right?

...and all most of us, including you and I, do is "self indulgent venting". (Actually, it's just venting, because it is, by nature, self indulgent.)

I'm trying to take a more practical view of world events. Yes, there is good and bad, right and wrong, but they're often so jumbled up it's hard to tell where things fall on the big balance. After something's over and done, we can talk about it, but it won't change anything that already happened. Whether or not anyone thinks killing a past, present and (probably) future terrorist who leads an association of terrorists is a good or bad thing, it already happened. I don't this will all happen again the same way... I mean OBL. The argument probably will go on forever, in infinite variation.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Teribus
Date: 14 May 11 - 12:07 PM

I still see that Don T is banging on about "vigilantism".

Let me see the action of a vigilante is:

1: Totally unauthorised, completely unofficial.

2: The independent action of a private individual or a small group of like minded private individuals who have no official standing.

Looking at the killing of Osama bin Laden:

1: He declared himself the head of an international terrorist group, that had declared war on the United States of America and her allies and had ordered his followers to kill any American man, woman or child wherever and whenever the opportunity presented itself.

2: Under his own definitions he would never describe himself as anything other than an enemy combatant with respect to the forces of the United States of America.

3: The people who killed bin Laden were members of the US Navy SEALS, a duly constituted, recognised and fully authorised branch of the armed forces of the United States of America.

4: The people who killed bin Laden were acting under orders from their Commander-in-Chief, who personally authorised this mission.

5: In the performance of their duties in carrying out this raid Osama bin Laden was shot and killed as an enemy combatant.

No grounds whatsoever could be established to substantiate calling this the act of a "vigilante", or could describe it as an example of "vigilantism".

Had this been an operation aimed at the specific execution of Osama bin Laden then everyone in the compound would have been killed. Every single body would have been removed. And most important of all nobody would have said a thing about it. There would have been no grand announcements.

I totally agree with Guest999.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Charley Noble
Date: 14 May 11 - 11:28 AM

Sad to say, I have to agree with 999 as well.

But most of the posts on this thread are a classic example of self-indulgent venting.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Jeri
Date: 14 May 11 - 11:06 AM

999, I agree 100%. I don't think we would have ever gotten permission. I think the Pakistani government, at least those not in bed with Al Qeda, are glad, although they can't really say so. We went in, killed him, then got the hell out. If we'd had him stand trial, he'd wind up dead too, but there would have been a whole lot of stuff in between, possibly including more deaths and things going "boom". And terrorist killings of innocents of another country are NOT simple crimes.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 May 11 - 10:42 AM

What about the massive loss of life in the March bombings in Pakistan.
Islamist militants seeking to overthrow the government have bombed hundreds of police, army, commercial and civilian targets in Pakistan over the past three years. ISI offices in the Punjabi cities of Multan and Lahore have been attacked, as well as in the northwest city of Peshawar.

No change.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 14 May 11 - 10:17 AM

Pretty obvious really - the US attack, on Pakistan's soil, puts its ally, Pakistan in the hot seat. It puts all opponents of the Taliban in the hot seat. Why is the ugly American unable to understand that?

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: GUEST,Jim Knowledge
Date: 14 May 11 - 09:57 AM

I `ad one of them taliban in my cab the other day. Funny `at, scraggy beard and a grenade launcher.
I said, "Morning Mohammed, where to today?"
`e said, "Allah mode Jim, could you take me to that Mustaq`s Kebab `ouse in Barking. It doubles up as a mosque when `es not cooking. We`re `olding a memorial do for Osama Bin Liner, the martyr."
I said, "Martyr! You`re `aving a laugh. I never once saw a picture of `im wearing a suicide belt, only the other poor suckers."
`e said, "No, I know. `e was allergic to explosives!!"

Whaddam I Like??

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: GUEST,999
Date: 14 May 11 - 09:45 AM

Well, three things which should piss EVERYone off:

1) I`m glad the murdering bastard (OBL or UBL depending on whether you`re an ordinary guy or a CIA wannabee) is dead

2) If I knew how to reach the SEALs who killed him I`d send a box of chocolates

3) As for those who figure OBL should have received a trial--he did. He chose his verdict when he began to slaughter people in the name of his religion. Fuck him!

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 May 11 - 08:55 AM

Don T, I quoted Don F and stated 2 brief facts about casualty numbers.

For that you would do me harm.
I have been in some arguments here in the last dozen years, but I have never been threatened like that!
And why do you have to use such language?
You should work on your anger and aggression.

It is so easy for Taliban to blow people up close the their tribal homelands in Pakistan.
Just a 50 minute drive.

They already had plans to attack Western targets.
They can not increase an already all out effort.
They already hated us, even before Iraq and Afghanistan.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: bobad
Date: 14 May 11 - 08:13 AM

'The Pakistani government has demanded that the US cease the current drone attacks carried out within Pakistani territory, and threaten to cut off supply routes to coalition forces in Afghanistan if the US do not comply.

There is a further call for the Pakistani government to mount a full public inquiry into the circumstances of the raid."


You really have very little understanding of the internal politics of Pakistan, specifically the relationship between government and military. Here is a quote in regards to the above from someone who does:

"As Al-Qaeda and Taliban commit mass murder in Pakistan, the country's cowardly politicians succumb to military blackmail and condemn not the Taliban, but the USA!"

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: bobad
Date: 14 May 11 - 08:06 AM

"As Bobad said ""They killed fellow Muslims -- WTF is the matter with you people?""

So that's all right then! No need to worry till they get round to the US civilians.

I don't think I look at all prejudiced compared to THAT!"



I see that your logic is as twisted as theirs is, but that is to be expected.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 14 May 11 - 07:55 AM

""Why can't you just be nice, like the other Don?""

Do you and Don F consider it nice to ignore everything that I have said, and claim that I, (and others who disagree with you) are terrorist sympathisers and anti American?

I have been at pains to make reference to the US government, not the US people, throughout this thread, so where is the Anti American sentiment which you attribute to me?

I have lost count of the times I have repeated that I have no problem with the fact that ObL is dead (though I think that he got off too lightly). It is the way in which that was achieved to which I object.

Eighty innocent Pakistanis have already paid some of the price for this "victory", which doesn't seem to bother any of you at all.

As Bobad said ""They killed fellow Muslims -- WTF is the matter with you people?""

So that's all right then! No need to worry till they get round to the US civilians.

I don't think I look at all prejudiced compared to THAT!

By the way Keith (assuming that you have bothered to read this far, which is unlikely on past evidence), if you choose to repeat what somebody else has posted and add to it, you can't go back and hide from your endorsement of by claiming you didn't say it.

You DID SAY IT! And you did believe it. Now have the guts to own it.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 14 May 11 - 07:34 AM

""I'm still looking in from time to time. And I see that prejudice is still rife. Why am I not surprised?""

If you keep trotting off at regular intervals your posts still get responses, as do mine and everyone else's......Live with it!

And pardon me for being prejudiced, but I am convinced that I am entitled to a little prejudice against being made a target by the ill advised vigilante behaviour of a supposed ally, which is the only prejudice I have exhibited here.

Incidentally, this report on BBC News this morning.

The Pakistani government has demanded that the US cease the current drone attacks carried out within Pakistani territory, and threaten to cut off supply routes to coalition forces in Afghanistan if the US do not comply.

There is a further call for the Pakistani government to mount a full public inquiry into the circumstances of the raid.

So Keith can no longer use his standard mantra that nobody is complaining.

I think that the eventual cost of this will be more than the most gung ho Americans would consider reasonable, and the US government may find that the whole thing blows up in its face.

Don

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: bobad
Date: 14 May 11 - 07:28 AM

The Taliban are retaliating against America by killing Muslims in Pakistan????

You people sure are twisted.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 14 May 11 - 07:20 AM

Bobad - 0644 - "They killed fellow Muslims -- WTF is the matter with you people?"

Are we to infer, Bobad, that they don't count?

Are we to infer that personnel in training by an ally of the US to patrol and police the tribal areas between Pakistan and Afghanistan, being trained to oppose the Taliban - are somehow in your twisted mind enemies of the USA and allies of the Taliban?

Or is it just that they are Muslims? Incidentally, how do you know that they were all Muslims? There are Xtians in Pakistan you know?


Let me explain. This was a Taliban attack on the forces of the Pakistan state that is officially an ally of the USA. It was because the Pakistan state is officially an ally of the USA.

I told you so.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 14 May 11 - 07:16 AM

""They killed fellow Muslims -- WTF is the matter with you people?""

And stated that it was in reprisal for what? American action!

I kind of expected that the killings would be quite acceptable to you, as long as they stick to Pakistanis or British and leave Israel and the US alone.

When they get round to the US, don't expect the same level of sympathy you had after 9/11.

The UK had no part in this game, but we'll be targets too.

One day you guys will be asking the same questions I'm asking now.

Just because you could, should you have done it, and was it worth it?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 May 11 - 04:10 AM

No danger of that Jim.
There are no more for you to show.
It is a lie.
Just giving a date/time or a link would not affect this discussion at all.
But you can not.
You lie.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 May 11 - 04:04 AM

"Let's see them then."
I can only put this down to a deliberate attempt on your part to wreck this discussion - if you continue with your obsessive behaviour I hope somebody has the good sense to have you removed from this thread.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 May 11 - 03:41 AM

"they'll do very nicely as starters, but lots more to choose from."

Let's see them then.
I kept asking for just that courtesy.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 May 11 - 03:38 AM

Thank you for putting up examples of your highly florid crocodile tears Keith - they'll do very nicely as starters, but lots more to choose from.
Excuse me for not joining you in turning this thread into yet another pointless slanging match between us, in deference to those who wish continue discussing the topic in hand - couldn't if I wanted to - off to sunny (I hope) Corfu tomorrow.
On topic.
Despite what has been claimed above nobody here has expressed the slightest degree of support or sympathy for Osama bin Laden; that remains a figment of the imagination of those wishing to defend the indefencible (don't you just know your point has struck home when your opponents deliberately distort what you have to say?)
Kidnapping, false imprisonment in intolerable conditions, torture, assasination, indescriminate killing... these are the things we associate with terrorism, yet these have become the accepted practices of those supposedly involved in George Bush's "fight against tourism" - the 'anti-terrorists' are becoming indistinguishable from those they are fighting.
Iraq and Afghanistan have proved that this war cannot be won militarily; it might be contained for a while, but it is there waiting in the wings, ready to bring about more 9/11s or 7/7s.
Al Qaeda is a world wide, non- connected, non-organistion; four replacements for bin Laden were immediately identified following his death, scattered all over the Middle East - I wonder if the intention is to kill them all - then the ones that follow - then the ones that follow them......
As I see it, the only way to oppose them is to cut off their support; to attempt to win the hearts and minds of their would-be followers. This won't be done by invading sovereign territory, endangering the lives of innocents and humiliating governments in order to assassinate somebody whose strategic role was, at best, highly questionable and who is as replacable as member of any pub quiz team.
With the events in countries like Libya, Egypt, Algeria, Tunisia, there are signs of a desire for a break with the old ways - this cowboys and Indians shoot-out is no way to make the best of welcome developments at a time they could go either way.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 May 11 - 02:03 AM

You ridiculed me for this post too.

06 Apr 11 - 12:29 PM

Again you deny and betray the child victims.
They all say they were raped by gangs of BPs, not by other groups.
Why will you not listen to those poor raped children.
No-one likes it, any more than you do.
But, it is a fact and we should learn to deal with it.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 May 11 - 01:59 AM

This one Jim?

06 Apr 11 - 03:22 AM

Jim you repeated my question to Lox.
"WHY WON'T YOU LISTEN TO THE CHILD VICTIMS????"

I put the same question to you.
Everyone states that they were raped by gangs of BPs.
Not one has been found who identifies any other group.
Why won't you listen?

To save your face you try to make liars of these children.
That itself is abuse.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 May 11 - 01:54 AM

Jim, this is the first post about gang raped children that you ridiculed as "crocdile tears."

5th April 2011 1.12AM

We have heard many victims' stories now.
Emma, the girl in the Woman's Hour interview, cases detailed in Lively's links.
Cases in the various articles such as Yorkshire Post.
All very similar, and I found them deeply moving.
You don't even remember.
The only thought elicited in you was, "how can I discredit them?"

Hillary Wilmer is universally praised and admired for her work.
We have read some of her victims' stories.
She offered them as typical examples.
She has hundreds.

We know they exist.
You shut your ears to the cries.
You wont hear or see anything that challenges your preconceptions.

Perhaps I should have looked for a better word to describe you.

Subject: RE: BS: obit: Osama Bin Laden ???
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 May 11 - 01:30 AM

Don T, the quote was from Don F.
I expect you missed it because it was part of a longish post.

My only comment was
"9/11 cost us 67 dead.
The single biggest loss of British life for any act of terrorism.
52 dead on 7/7."

You would assault me physically for stating those facts?
You are also the only person to have used the word "fucking" or anything like it on this thread.
Why can't you just be nice, like the other Don?