Butch Femme Planet

Butch Femme Planet (http://www.butchfemmeplanet.com/forum/index.php)
-   In The News (http://www.butchfemmeplanet.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=117)
-   -   OSAMA BINLADEN IS DEAD (http://www.butchfemmeplanet.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3172)

violaine 05-02-2011 08:59 PM

oh. that was merely a brief/ quick reference after my poc friend and i had a conversation. i posted to topic.

i'm sure that i could find more-

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/wash...anics-too.html

AtLast 05-02-2011 09:16 PM

One analysis about capture, not killing him..
 
Full transcript link-
http://www.npr.org/templates/transcr...ryId=135917389

Lawrence Wright: Bin Laden's Death 'Long In Coming'

The CIA was reaching out to screenwriters, such as I had done, and I said: Well, you know, I'm a reporter. I can't go writing screenplays for the CIA. But I'll tell you in the form of an op-ed for the New York Times what I think if we were able to catch bin Laden.

First of all, remember that bin Laden is the most famous man in the world. He's going to be one of the most famous men in history. So if you have the good luck to catch him, you have to deal with the legacy, not just the man.

And if you catch him, don't kill him because he'll become a martyr, which is what he seeks to be. But don't take him to America just yet.

First of all, take him to Kenya, where on August 6, 1998, he set off a bomb in front of an American embassy, killing 224 people and wounding, blinding 150 Africans. Let him sit in a courtroom in Nairobi and tell 150 blind Africans that he was just striking at a symbol of American power.

And then you can take him to Tanzania, where on the same day, he set off another bomb in front of another American embassy, killing 11 people, all of them Muslims. And bin Laden excused that because it was Friday, and good Muslims would be in the mosque.

I think that would be a wonderful venue to talk about what a good Muslim actually is. And then you could bring him to America and have him answer for the death of the 17 sailors on the USS Cole in October, 2000, and the 3,000 Americans who died on 9/11.

But you don't have to stop there. You can take him so many places. You know, Casablanca, Madrid, London, Bali. But just take him one last place. Take him home and try him under Sharia law, which is the only law that he and his followers would respect.

And if he's convicted, he would be taken to a square in downtown Riyadh, and the executioner is a big man with a long sword, and it's Saudi custom for the executioner to go out and ask the crowd, which is composed of the victims of the condemned man, to forgive him.

And if they couldn't do that, then the executioner would do his job, and bin Laden would be taken and buried in an unmarked Wahhabi graveyard. And I thought in that manner, you could begin to roll back some of his awful legacy.


The whole interview is available via the link above.

Gayla 05-02-2011 10:10 PM

I spend my days driving around, listening to the local news station on the radio (unless there is a baseball game on, then I listen to that). Today was all about this. I listened to approximately 10.5 hours of news coverage. I heard everything from the local response from the guys who hang out in a bar by the military base to the national interviews with, well, with everyone to the one hour special report ABC radio just did.

What I've heard, and what I believe to be true, is that this was a capture or kill mission. He was given the option of surrendering to the special forces and he chose not to. Of course, they would have rather taken him alive but he wasn't going to let that happen.

I also heard, and I believe, that in addition to not wanting to create a shrine at his place of burial, the main reason he was buried at sea is because no country was willing to take his body.

I fully expect the conspiracy theorist to run rampant. I've already heard that he really died 10 years ago, that they actually took him out a month ago and just delayed the news for political gain, that they didn't kill him and he's currently in custody somewhere, that they didn't bury him at sea and are holding his body somewhere, and it goes on and on and on.

Call me naive but until I have something to go on other than random Facebook rants, I will believe what the President tells me.

I still don't feel like this is something to celebrate but it has been interesting to see the little pockets of patriotism that have sprung up since last night. I noticed more flags flying today than I have in a long time. The corner byt he post office where the tea party/pro life folks usually hang out, was occupied today by a random group of folks that I've never seen before. They weren't chanting or singing or really making much of a fuss at all - just standing there, waving their flags. As I sat at the light, a few more folks joined them and by the time I was making my way home they had filled up all four corners of the intersection. I honked and waved.

BullDog 05-02-2011 11:04 PM

I don't believe that peace comes from killing someone. My first reaction was to post the "Imagine" video. I am not celebrating his death.

However, I do believe President Obama and the Navy Seals did their job with professionalism and efficiency. President Obama also gave credit to the Bush Administration- something I can't imagine a Republican President doing in return.

Perhaps I am naive, but I don't think anything seems fishy. If President Obama was doing it for political gain I would think he would have timed this closer to the re-election time and not now. Americans have a short memory. I don't think President Obama would try to fake anything of this nature, so yes I believe Bin Laden is dead and don't think anyone is trying to hide any evidence by burying him at sea. I do believe they tried to respect how his body was handled.

I would have preferred to have seen him brought to trial, but on the other hand I do believe under the leadership of President Obama that the killing of Bin Laden was done as professionally and as ethically as possible.

Now we wait to see what comes next. I believe everyone involved in this mission is very clear that it is far from over.

p.s. thank you Nat for posting the link for President Obama's announcement on the internet. I don't watch tv, so would have missed it otherwise.

Mitmo01 05-02-2011 11:36 PM

If any other country on the face of the earth went through 9/11 like the United States has, they would have hunted him down as well.....he got what he chose....and his death in his mansion was his choosing....unlike the victims of his operations.....he deserved what he got...in my opinion...

Gayla 05-03-2011 12:26 AM

My time in front of an actual computer is so limited these days that I find myself having to cram a whole day's worth of news reading and posting into just a few hours in the middle of the night. So please just pretend that I'm posting these throughout the day like I used to! :)

As I flip through the photos on the news sites and see the images of the celebrations in NYC and in front of the White House I find myself thinking about similar images that I've seen on the news most all of my life. In the past, these have always been of people in other countries, usually, celebrating the downfall, or death, of some "bad" leader or regime. But, I also remember crowds cheering around burning US flags and celebrating when US embassies have been attacked.

I can't help but draw comparisons to those images and the pictures from last night's celebrations and wonder if people around the world are reacting to those images the same way we've reacted in the past. It's striking a couple of different chords within me and making me question some of my own thoughts and feelings around my "why's" of it.

Over the last month, often more than a few times a day, I've had the opportunity to, literally, come face to face with some of my own internal prejudices in ways that I've never had to before. While that's totally a topic for a different thread, I can't ignore the similarities and the interconnectedness of it for me right now, even more so in the events of this last 24 hours.

I've got some "us" vs "them" things going on that make me uncomfortable. Does this mean we are now no "better than them". Have we become just like "those people". I don't like that I'm even thinking in those types of terms but I can admit right now I am and that I'm also aware that's probably at the base of my overall uncomfortableness with the celebrations. As someone else mentioned, I'd like to think that we are "better than that" but even that thought makes me cringe a little inside.

Honestly, I'm surprised at how complex my thoughts and reactions are around all of this.

morningstar55 05-03-2011 05:03 AM

i dont know about anyone else.........
.......... but

all this news everywhere i turn too, on line , news paper, tv, radio...... people all rejoicing in Osama dead....

makes me think of this.........



girl_dee 05-03-2011 06:03 AM

Forgive me for not being up to speed on the details, I don't watch tv and have stayed away from the media hype, but were the other people killed in the raid buried at sea as well? Have they disclosed this? I couldn't find any info on this.

Gráinne 05-03-2011 06:11 AM

While I suppose I'm glad that justice was served, I still see no difference in the celebrations over his death and the ones in the Middle East over 9/11. Both make me feel very uncomfortable.

The_Lady_Snow 05-03-2011 06:48 AM

Killing One Monster, Unleashing Another: Reflections on Revenge and Revelry


Tim Wise


May 2, 2011, 8:15 pm

There is a particularly trenchant scene in the documentary film, Robert Blecker Wants Me Dead, in which Blecker - who teaches at New York University School of Law and is the nation's most prominent pro-death penalty scholar - travels to Tennessee's Riverbend Prison for the execution of convicted murderer, Daryl Holton. Blecker is adamant that Holton, who murdered his own children, deserves to die for his crime. Yet, when he gets to the prison on the evening of Holton's electrocution, Blecker is disturbed not only by the anti-death penalty forces whom he views as dangerously naive, but also by those who have come to literally cheer the state-sponsored killing. He agrees with their ultimate position, but can't understand why they feel the need to celebrate death, to party as a life is taken. The event is somber, he tries to tell them. Human life is precious, he insists; so precious, in Blecker's mind, that occasionally we must take the lives of killers so as to reinforce that respect for human life. But there is no reason to revel in the death of another, he tries to explain. While I disagree with Blecker on the matter of the death penalty, I felt sympathy for him in that moment, trying to thread the needle between advocacy of killing - any killing - and the retention of the nuance that allows the supporter of such a thing to still preach about the sanctity of life. It was a nice attempt, and heartfelt.
Of course, his pleas for solemnity fall on deaf ears. His ideological compatriots cannot comprehend him. They even misunderstand his position on the ultimate issue, presuming at first that his unwillingness to cheer the death of one as evil as Holton means he must oppose the death penalty, and that he doesn't care about the children Holton killed. Ultimately, Blecker walks away, clearly shaken, not in his support for capital punishment, but by the way in which others on his own side seem to literally glorify death, even need it.
I was reminded of this scene today, while watching coverage of the celebrations around the country (but especially in Washington D.C. and Manhattan), which began last night when it was announced that Osama bin Laden was dead. In front of the White House were thousands of affluent and overprivileged (and mostly white) college students from George Washington University (among the nation's most expensive schools), partying like it was spring break. Never needing an excuse to binge drink, the GW and Georgetown co-eds responded to the news of bin Laden's death as though their team had just won the Final Four. That none of them would have had the guts to actually go and fight the war that they seem to support so vociferously - after all, a stint in the military might disrupt their plans to work on Wall Street, or to become high-powered lawyers, or just get in the way of their spring formal - matters not, one supposes. They have other people to do the hard work for them. They always have.
In New York, the throngs assembled may have been more economically diverse, but the revelry was similar. Lots of flags, chants of "U.S.A., U.S.A.," and an overall "rah-rah" attitude akin to that which one might experience at a BCS Bowl game, and once again, mostly led by guys who would never, themselves, have gone to war, to get bin Laden or anyone else.
You have to wonder - or actually, you don't because the answer is so distressingly obvious - would these throngs pour into the streets to celebrate in this fashion if it were announced that a cure for cancer had been discovered, or for AIDS? Would thousands of people be jumping up and down belting out patriotic chants if the president were to announce that our country's scientists had found a new, affordable method for wiping out all childhood disease, malnutrition or malaria in poor countries around the world? Though these maladies kill far more than Osama bin Laden ever dreamt of slaughtering, and although any of these developments would be a source of intense pride for millions, there is almost no chance that they would be met with drunken revelry. Partying is what we do when we kill people, when we beat someone, when we grind them to dust. It is not what we do when we save lives or end suffering. Saving lives or doing humanitarianism is like making love, while killing people is tantamount to a good, hard, and largely one-sided fuck; and unfortunately we know which of these two things men, in particular, are more apt to prefer.
Don't get me wrong: I am not a pacifist. I know there are times when violence may be necessary, either in self-defense, vicarious defense of others, or to prevent greater violence. If you were to break into my house and attempt to harm my family, let there be no misunderstanding: you would die, and I would kill you, without so much as a moment's hesitation. But I would not, upon having taken your life (however justified), proceed to pop a cold one, invite friends over and dance around your bloody body. I would not be happy about what I had done. Taking a life, even when you have no choice, is no cause for joy. It is a grave and serious event; and it is utterly unnatural, such that militaries the world over have to dehumanize their enemies and work furiously to break down their soldiers' natural human tendencies to not kill. The fact that violence may be necessary in certain cases, and even in the case of stopping bin Laden, cannot, in and of itself justify raucous celebrations of his death at the hands of the United States.
So yes, we can argue that bin Laden deserved to die. But that's the easy part. Beyond what one deserves, whether they be terrorists or just street criminals, there is the matter of what society needs. And it may be that what a healthy society needs is less bombastic rhetoric, less celebratory embrace of violence, and less jingoistic nationalism, even if that means that we have to respond to the news of bin Laden's death with a more muted tone, perhaps being thankful in private, or even drinking a toast with friends in our own homes, but not turning the matter into public spectacle, the likes of which cheapens matters of life and death to little more than a contest whose results can be tallied on a scoreboard.
It may prove cathartic that one the likes of bin Laden is dead. His death may provide an opportunity for a much-needed exhaling; but that doesn't render it the proper subject of a pep rally. And given the larger need to challenge the mentality of disposability that is at the root of all murderous violence, it may be that in such moments we would be far better off to solemnly commemorate the death of the monster than to cheer it openly, when the latter is so likely to inflame passions on the part of those whose allegiance to the monster remained unsullied right to the end.
Ultimately, the mentality of human disposability that animates war, terrorism, gang violence and all forms of homicidal street crime, is a dangerous one to indulge, and certainly to indulge giddily. Such a mindset feeds upon itself, perpetuates itself without end, and serves to ratify the same in others. Surely we should strive to do better, even when, for various reasons, we can't manage it, and are required to take life for one reason or another. Most soldiers, after all, are not happy or self-satisfied about the things they've done in war. For many, if not most, killing even when you have no choice, is life-changing. It scars. It comes back in the middle of the night, haunting the soldier's dreams for years, and sometimes forever. We do not honor them or their sacrifices by treating the mortal decisions they so often have to make as if they were no more gut-wrenching than those made during the playing of a video game.
Perhaps the only thing more disturbing than the celebrations unleashed in the wake of bin Laden's demise was the cynical way in which the president suggested that his killing proved "America can do whatever we set our mind to." If this is, indeed, the lesson of bin Laden's death, then this only suggests we clearly don't want to diminish, let alone end, child poverty, excess mortality rates in communities of color, rape and sexual assault of women (including the many thousands who have been victimized in the U.S. military), or food insecurity for millions of families; because we aren't addressing any of those things with nearly the aplomb as that put to warfare and the killing of our adversaries.
We are, if the president is serious here, a nation that has narrowly constricted its marketable talents to the deployment of violence. We can't manufacture much of anything, but we can kill you. We can't fix our schools, or build adequate levees to protect a city like New Orleans from floodwaters. But we can kill you. We can't reduce infant mortality to anywhere near the level of other industrialized nations with which we like to compare ourselves. But we can kill you. We can't break the power of Wall Street bankers, or jail any of those bankers and money managers who helped orchestrate the global financial collapse. But we can kill you. We can't protect LGBT youth from bullying in schools, or ensure equal opportunity for all in the labor market, regardless of race, gender, sexuality or any other factor. But we can kill you. Booyah, bitches.
But somewhere, I suspect, there is a young child - maybe the age of one of my own - who is sitting in front of a television tonight in Karachi, or Riyadh. And he's watching footage of some fraternity boy, American flag wrapped around his back, cheering the death of one who this child believes, for whatever fucked up reason, is a hero, and now, a martyr.
And I know that this child will likely do what all such children do; namely, forget almost nothing, remember almost everything, and plan for the day when he will make you remember it too, and when you will know his name. And if (or when) that day comes, the question will be, was your party worth it?


Nat 05-03-2011 10:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Novelafemme (Post 331864)
"I mourn the loss of thousands of precious lives, but I will not rejoice in the death of one, not even an enemy. Returning hate for hate multiplies hate, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness: only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that."-Martin Luther King, Jr.

I'm not sure if this has already been said, but late last night I found out this quote was misattributed to Martin Luther King Jr. I wanted to set the record straight because I backed this quote up by providing part of an actual speech by him - and I never doubted that this quoted quote was made up.

**takes bite of humble pie**

http://mashable.com/2011/05/03/altered-mlk-quote/

Novelafemme 05-03-2011 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nat (Post 332166)
I'm not sure if this has already been said, but late last night I found out this quote was misattributed to Martin Luther King Jr. I wanted to set the record straight because I backed this quote up by providing part of an actual speech by him - and I never doubted that this quoted quote was made up.

**takes bite of humble pie**

http://mashable.com/2011/05/03/altered-mlk-quote/


My thoughts...

One important thing not being acknowledged in this discourse is how many people were reaching out to one of our greatest leaders in nonviolent social change as a way to make sense of their own response to this violent action. Sometimes solidarity in this way is important as is seeking out the words of great leaders we respect as means to make sense of reactions we might not yet have vocabulary for. I also think the misattribution of that one sentence is being blown out of proportion instead of focusing on how many and how much people wanted to communicate the sentiment embedded in that quote.

Linus 05-03-2011 11:55 AM

Just for interesting sake: http://www.boingboing.net/2011/05/02...a-bin-lad.html

Apparently there are quite a few who do not know who Osama Bin Laden is and why his death is so important. :blink: Maybe I should stick this in the :| thread since that what it made me do.

Starbuck 05-03-2011 05:42 PM

What the?
 
I don't watch much tv and that I do watch is usually from the DVR so I can rush through commercials. I listen to mostly CDs and therefore do not get radio news either...guess I'm kinda protected from, or ignorant of (if you will), all the negativity shown in the media and on tv in general. I'm just sick to death of hearing about it.

I still haven't seen anything on the tv about Osama's death, don't really care to either. But that doesn't change the fact that I am glad that the hunt for his sorry ass is over! Notice I did not say I was glad he was dead, I said I am glad the hunt for him is over...BIG difference! I do hope that this will help draw down American troop involvement "over there" so our men and women can stop dying too young.

Toughy 05-04-2011 08:42 AM

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_bin_laden_geronimo

Senate official: Wrong to link bin Laden, Geronimo

The top staffer for the Senate Indian Affairs Committee is objecting to the U.S. military's use of the code name "Geronimo" for Osama bin Laden during the raid that killed the al-Qaida leader.

Geronimo was an Apache leader in the 19th century who spent many years fighting the Mexican and U.S. armies until his surrender in 1886.

Loretta Tuell, staff director and chief counsel for the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, said Tuesday it was inappropriate to link Geronimo, whom she called "one of the greatest Native American heroes," with one of the most hated enemies of the United States."These inappropriate uses of Native American icons and cultures are prevalent throughout our society, and the impacts to Native and non-Native children are devastating," Tuell said.

Tuell is a member of the Nez Perce tribe and grew on the tribe's reservation in Idaho. The Senate Indian Affairs panel had previously scheduled a hearing for Thursday on racial stereotypes of native people. Tuell said the use of Geronimo in the bin Laden raid will be discussed.

Steven Newcomb, a columnist for the weekly newspaper Indian Country Today, criticized what he called a disrespectful use of a name revered by many Native Americans.

"Apparently, having an African-American president in the White House is not enough to overturn the more than 200-year American tradition of treating and thinking of Indians as enemies of the United States," Newcomb wrote.

After bin Laden was killed, the military sent a message back to the White House: "Geronimo EKIA" — enemy killed in action. "It's another attempt to label Native Americans as terrorists," said Paula Antoine of the Rosebud Sioux Tribe in South Dakota.

A White House spokesman referred questions about the code name to the Pentagon. A Defense Department spokeswoman declined to comment.

Jefferson Keel, president of National Congress of American Indians, the largest organization representing American Indians and Alaska Natives, said, "Osama bin Laden was a shared enemy."

Keel said that since 2001, 77 American Indians and Alaskan Natives have died defending the U.S. in Afghanistan and Iraq. More than 400 have been wounded.


AtLast 05-04-2011 09:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toughy (Post 332816)
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_bin_laden_geronimo

Senate official: Wrong to link bin Laden, Geronimo

The top staffer for the Senate Indian Affairs Committee is objecting to the U.S. military's use of the code name "Geronimo" for Osama bin Laden during the raid that killed the al-Qaida leader.

Geronimo was an Apache leader in the 19th century who spent many years fighting the Mexican and U.S. armies until his surrender in 1886.

Loretta Tuell, staff director and chief counsel for the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, said Tuesday it was inappropriate to link Geronimo, whom she called "one of the greatest Native American heroes," with one of the most hated enemies of the United States."These inappropriate uses of Native American icons and cultures are prevalent throughout our society, and the impacts to Native and non-Native children are devastating," Tuell said.

Tuell is a member of the Nez Perce tribe and grew on the tribe's reservation in Idaho. The Senate Indian Affairs panel had previously scheduled a hearing for Thursday on racial stereotypes of native people. Tuell said the use of Geronimo in the bin Laden raid will be discussed.

Steven Newcomb, a columnist for the weekly newspaper Indian Country Today, criticized what he called a disrespectful use of a name revered by many Native Americans.

"Apparently, having an African-American president in the White House is not enough to overturn the more than 200-year American tradition of treating and thinking of Indians as enemies of the United States," Newcomb wrote.

After bin Laden was killed, the military sent a message back to the White House: "Geronimo EKIA" — enemy killed in action. "It's another attempt to label Native Americans as terrorists," said Paula Antoine of the Rosebud Sioux Tribe in South Dakota.

A White House spokesman referred questions about the code name to the Pentagon. A Defense Department spokeswoman declined to comment.

Jefferson Keel, president of National Congress of American Indians, the largest organization representing American Indians and Alaska Natives, said, "Osama bin Laden was a shared enemy."

Keel said that since 2001, 77 American Indians and Alaskan Natives have died defending the U.S. in Afghanistan and Iraq. More than 400 have been wounded.



Thanks for this post, Toughy. this really does need to be discussed. When I first saw some coverage about this and Geronimo being used, I thought WTF? So, Native Americans must be very upset. I hope this starts to get more press.

On another note (not directed to this post, but to discussions about Muslim burial)- I'm feeling like there is a clear distinction being made (that I didn't not get at all at first) about his body preparation and burial at sea.

His body was treated with regard for Muslim burial preparation, but there is really not a claim that a sea burial is accepted as proper to Muslims (other than some claims that if that is where the body is within the time appropriate time frame) that our actual putting him out to sea is keeping with Muslim traditions. In fact, the sea burial was a very conscious decision so that his followers had no place to martyr him or make into a shrine for him.

So, my present understanding is that the body preparation was done according to Muslim traditions, but not the sea burial and the US is not claiming that it was. Which brings up a whole other set of criticisms. I am not agreeing with this action- I am exploring why it.

This certainly doesn't let us off the hook to criticism for not honoring these traditions, however. And this can certainly have some negative consequences for the US. I hope there will be more information given about this that includes Muslim experts.

Mister Bent 05-04-2011 11:21 AM

"They say that revenge is a dish that's best served cold. We've been waiting a long time for this particular dish to cool, and now that I've eaten it, I'm surprised to find that it's pretty tasteless and unsatisfying."

This article succinctly sums it up for me; acknowledging that bin Laden's death was, effectively, mere retaliation. We gain nothing. We are not safer, no troops are coming home, the waste that was the war in Iraq (where were the weapons of mass destruction? Did we end or even deter terrorism as a result?) can't be erased.

Ten years later, I feel none of the righteous joy that I expected. It mostly just fills me with grief for all the deaths between then and now that should never have happened. I'm glad we've taken a terrorist out of circulation, of course. But maybe because I'm older, and mortality seems all too depressingly real, I find it hard to celebrate anyone's death--no, not even Bin Laden's. The families of the victims deserved some satisfaction, of course, and a certainly hope they got it. But these days, all of humanity seems so fragile to me, the universes of our minds so easily destroyed. No matter how much Team Death deserves to win, I find it hard to cheer when the Grim Reaper does his victory dance in the end zone.

Don't get me wrong: I do not think killing Bin Laden was morally or even tactically wrong. I just think it's profoundly unsatisfying. We won't recover any of the things that he took from us, or even the things we took from ourselves, like the ability to travel around the country without being treated like a potential terrorist. Destroying Osama did not unmake him, which is what I really wanted. He may be dead, but we're still living with him.

(Emphasis mine.)


AtLast 05-04-2011 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister Bent (Post 332873)
"They say that revenge is a dish that's best served cold. We've been waiting a long time for this particular dish to cool, and now that I've eaten it, I'm surprised to find that it's pretty tasteless and unsatisfying."

This article succinctly sums it up for me; acknowledging that bin Laden's death was, effectively, mere retaliation. We gain nothing. We are not safer, no troops are coming home, the waste that was the war in Iraq (where were the weapons of mass destruction? Did we end or even deter terrorism as a result?) can't be erased.

Ten years later, I feel none of the righteous joy that I expected. It mostly just fills me with grief for all the deaths between then and now that should never have happened. I'm glad we've taken a terrorist out of circulation, of course. But maybe because I'm older, and mortality seems all too depressingly real, I find it hard to celebrate anyone's death--no, not even Bin Laden's. The families of the victims deserved some satisfaction, of course, and a certainly hope they got it. But these days, all of humanity seems so fragile to me, the universes of our minds so easily destroyed. No matter how much Team Death deserves to win, I find it hard to cheer when the Grim Reaper does his victory dance in the end zone.

Don't get me wrong: I do not think killing Bin Laden was morally or even tactically wrong. I just think it's profoundly unsatisfying. We won't recover any of the things that he took from us, or even the things we took from ourselves, like the ability to travel around the country without being treated like a potential terrorist. Destroying Osama did not unmake him, which is what I really wanted. He may be dead, but we're still living with him.

(Emphasis mine.)


Thanks for posting this. And now there will be all the analysis about Obama deciding not to publish the death photos. Get ready for the deluge!

Ebon 05-04-2011 03:21 PM

Just out of curiosity, does anyone know when and how did they get the original DNA sample to match it against the DNA's of dead Osama?

Corkey 05-04-2011 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ebon (Post 332961)
Just out of curiosity, does anyone know when and how did they get the original DNA sample to match it against the DNA's of dead Osama?

His family has given samples.

Lynn 05-04-2011 03:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister Bent (Post 332873)
"They say that revenge is a dish that's best served cold. We've been waiting a long time for this particular dish to cool, and now that I've eaten it, I'm surprised to find that it's pretty tasteless and unsatisfying."

This article succinctly sums it up for me; acknowledging that bin Laden's death was, effectively, mere retaliation. We gain nothing. We are not safer, no troops are coming home, the waste that was the war in Iraq (where were the weapons of mass destruction? Did we end or even deter terrorism as a result?) can't be erased.

Ten years later, I feel none of the righteous joy that I expected. It mostly just fills me with grief for all the deaths between then and now that should never have happened. I'm glad we've taken a terrorist out of circulation, of course. But maybe because I'm older, and mortality seems all too depressingly real, I find it hard to celebrate anyone's death--no, not even Bin Laden's. The families of the victims deserved some satisfaction, of course, and a certainly hope they got it. But these days, all of humanity seems so fragile to me, the universes of our minds so easily destroyed. No matter how much Team Death deserves to win, I find it hard to cheer when the Grim Reaper does his victory dance in the end zone.

Don't get me wrong: I do not think killing Bin Laden was morally or even tactically wrong. I just think it's profoundly unsatisfying. We won't recover any of the things that he took from us, or even the things we took from ourselves, like the ability to travel around the country without being treated like a potential terrorist. Destroying Osama did not unmake him, which is what I really wanted. He may be dead, but we're still living with him.

(Emphasis mine.)


My feelings exactly, including the emphases. Thanks.

AtLast 05-04-2011 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ebon (Post 332961)
Just out of curiosity, does anyone know when and how did they get the original DNA sample to match it against the DNA's of dead Osama?

One report pointed to family members. We have had a relationship with the royal family of Saudi Arabia for a long time. I think he is 17th out od 112 siblings! Lots of DNA out there to use- his family banished him long ago. There are probably fingerprints available too. Possibly blood samples via medical records via the family.

I hope the science and technology behind the facial progression recognition computer imaging is eventually released or a documentary done on it.

There could actually be his DNA preserved somewhere and has been profiled and preserved quite awhile ago. In his early terrorist days, he did partake in the actual events. Our CIA and even the FBI could have had access to this data through other countries including Saudi Arabia (he killed many in his own country). This would be right around the time there was thinking about preserving DNA but before the level of testing we have today.

I bet all of this will eventually be presented. Here is a link about the family DNA samples-

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/wash...milys-dna.html

This one is about forensic facial recognition softeware-

All identification techniques can have problems- so it appears there are several being used. The initial DNA results could have been within a few hours, but these would not be of the quality (accuracy) as the tests that take much longer. Oh, and good old dental records are in the mix!
http://www.thetruthaboutforensicscie...ama-bin-laden/

Miss Scarlett 05-04-2011 06:38 PM

With regard to DNA testing...i imagine he has children...it's as simple as testing the paternal bloodline. Unless he has an identical twin who could have fathered the child(ren).

AtLast 05-05-2011 02:24 PM

Info on Bin Laden- Bin Laden's history (pre-9/11), especially how very affluent he was. This was not a poor, uneducated, common Saudi man. He was part of the Saudi royal family. The guy did not grow up in caves! In fact, he took on the persona of the common Saudi to gain rapport with those he could train to carry out terror. He was very cunning sociopath- not a pious religious man.

He has been hunted by many countries worldwide for many years. His DNA as well as a whole host of other things from medical and dental records have been kept by intelligence agencies around the world.

This is one article that at least gives a glimpse into his history before the many attacks wordwide he had a part in.

So many folks seem to have very little knowledge about his history and only focus on 9/11. I have talked with people in real time many times that believe he was some kind of hero of the common people brought up with nothing. He received an education in elite schools and had access to billions of dollars.




http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...-al-Qaeda.html

EnderD_503 05-05-2011 02:44 PM

Quote:

TRALEE PEARCE
From Friday's Globe and Mail
Published Thursday, May. 05, 2011 4:17PM EDT

In the hours and days after Osama bin Laden’s death, television screens were filled with images of smiling Americans – many with their children in tow – flocking to the White House and the World Trade Center site to wave flags and cheer the death of an enemy.

One mother in Pennsylvania sent her son to elementary school with his face painted with the American flag and the date of Mr. bin Laden’s death. (She chose to take him home rather than comply with the school’s demand that he wash it off.)

The elated response gave many observers, including some Canadian parents, a queasy feeling about the moral implications of cheering revenge, especially for kids.

Parents and educators had the worst kind of teachable moment on their hands: the kind without a clear-cut lesson.

A known world terrorist was dead. That’s good, right? Our side killed him. Is that good? Or kind of sad, too?

Psychologists suggest the case could be confusing to children who are just starting to set their moral compasses. Kids can interpret the jubilant reactions to mean that if someone hurts them or their family, it’s okay to hurt them back, Washington-based psychologist Marilyn Price-Mitchell pointed out.

New Yorker Denene Millner blogged about telling her two daughters the news while trying to be sensitive. As she wrote on My Brown Baby, the news hit very close to home, but she called gleeful reactions “disgusting.”
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/...rticle2011561/

To me his death is neither here nor there. Whatever threat he may have posed was created by the US itself when it chose to intervene on the side of "freedom fighters" (aka extremists) during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Unfortunately these mistakes are being repeated in Libya in particular.

Instead of rejoicing over the death, maybe people should take this time to truly think about the effects of their actions, how American imperialist intervention in the Middle East and elsewhere has caused so much death and very little good whatsoever (and now Western power in general in Libya). How about learning from past mistakes instead of rejoicing over the death of a American made enemy and on the other side claiming how America is in the "right." That would evidently be asking too much.

On a side note, all this "god bless america" stuff makes me a bit queasy, really. That's so problematic I don't even know where to begin.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AtLastHome (Post 333497)
So many folks seem to have very little knowledge about his history and only focus on 9/11. I have talked with people in real time many times that believe he was some kind of hero of the common people brought up with nothing. He received an education in elite schools and had access to billions of dollars.

Probably left over from his elevation to "freedom fighter" by the US during the Soviet years.

Novelafemme 05-05-2011 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnderD_503 (Post 333509)
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/...rticle2011561/

To me his death is neither here nor there. Whatever threat he may have posed was created by the US itself when it chose to intervene on the side of "freedom fighters" (aka extremists) during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Unfortunately these mistakes are being repeated in Libya in particular.

Instead of rejoicing over the death, maybe people should take this time to truly think about the effects of their actions, how American imperialist intervention in the Middle East and elsewhere has caused so much death and very little good whatsoever (and now Western power in general in Libya). How about learning from past mistakes instead of rejoicing over the death of a American made enemy and on the other side claiming how America is in the "right." That would evidently be asking too much.

On a side note, all this "god bless america" stuff makes me a bit queasy, really. That's so problematic I don't even know where to begin.



Probably left over from his elevation to "freedom fighter" by the US during the Soviet years.

If I could stand up and applaud this post, I would. Excellent!

AtLast 05-05-2011 05:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnderD_503 (Post 333509)
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/...rticle2011561/

To me his death is neither here nor there. Whatever threat he may have posed was created by the US itself when it chose to intervene on the side of "freedom fighters" (aka extremists) during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Unfortunately these mistakes are being repeated in Libya in particular.

Instead of rejoicing over the death, maybe people should take this time to truly think about the effects of their actions, how American imperialist intervention in the Middle East and elsewhere has caused so much death and very little good whatsoever (and now Western power in general in Libya). How about learning from past mistakes instead of rejoicing over the death of a American made enemy and on the other side claiming how America is in the "right." That would evidently be asking too much.

On a side note, all this "god bless america" stuff makes me a bit queasy, really. That's so problematic I don't even know where to begin.



Probably left over from his elevation to "freedom fighter" by the US during the Soviet years.

Probably, yet, my guess is that most people in the US do not have much knowledge of even that time period and bin Laden! I am not very happy at times with our educational system- it has declined over the last few decades so terribly. And I feel that this contributes to some of the plain stupidity of our actions. Take a look at how our teachers are treated in the US and also credential programs here are not what they used to be as well as curriculum development. We are paying a high price for this. Believe me, Ender, I would love to sit down with younger people in the US that have not only the historical knowlwdge you and many others have, but the curiosity and sense of responsibility to pursue this knowledge. Just the internet alone puts so much more of this information in front of us. We don't need a degree to learn, just the wisdom to to do so. Although I agree with the imperial nature the US has played all over the world and it is not something I am proud of- all Western nations have contributed to very disrespectful treatment of various regions and continue to.

I know many people that have never set foot on a college campus that are avid readers of a multitude of subjects and can sit my butt right down and fill me in on things I do not know. Guess there needs to be a hunger for knowledge and to keep up with current events.

Sometimes, I do tire of the stereotypes of people in the US- more than half of us are to the left of center and do not like US imperialist ways. Many serve in our military and in our government- but at present, just don't have enough of a majority in our political institutions to get agendas moving in another direction. Hell, it has only been 2 years since "W" and "Dick"!

PS- I did see your mention on the Western powers involvement in Libya (UN). Sometimes I wonder if a strong multi-country aliance could be built among just people- and have some effect on all of these countries. An internation aliance with an understanding of how we all contribute to these insane acts against other countries. I knmow, I'm an idealist.

CherylNYC 05-05-2011 11:50 PM

Apologies in advance. I normally read all the way through a thread before I post, but I'm on painkillers due to an accident, and I just don't have enough continuity of thought at this time. I confess to having merely skimmed this thread, but I wanted to post my experiences here, anyway.

I live in a Brooklyn neighbourhood notable for it's Lower Manhattan views. Every time I see my amputated skyline I still don't recognise it, even nearly 10 years later. The attacks of 9/11 changed my city in so many ways I can't begin to name them, and none of those changes were positive. I didn't personally lose anyone in those attacks, but I lost my city as I knew it, and I took it all very personally.

I've been following bin Laden's career in terrorism since early in the Clinton administration. He was responsible for a great many horrible crimes. I knew instantly that he was responsible for the attacks of 9/11 since they bore his signature style. Like many, I rolled my eyes at Bush Jr's cowboy rhetoric following the attack, ("You can run, but you can't hide." Remember?), but I actually expected him to follow through on that promise. Silly me.

I was disgusted and appalled when it became increasingly obvious over the next year that Bush had no intention of capturing Osama bin Laden, and was instead using our loss as a pretext to attack Iraq, a country that had never attacked us. Sure, Saddam Hussein was a bad guy, but he wasn't the bad guy who attacked us. That bad guy was laughing his ass off at us while we spent our resources and precious young lives chasing his sworn enemy, Saddam Hussein. And we looked like a bunch of ignorant bigots who couldn't tell one Arab from another. I saw the failure to capture bin Laden as a clear issue of criminal justice. I became increasingly horrified that my money was about to be used to wage an illegal and immoral war, so I did the only thing I could think of.

Almost a year and a half after 9/11 I put up a sign in front of my house. It was a day-counter that asked one simple question. This past Sunday night my sign read:

9 years, 232 days since 9/11/01

WHERE IS OSAMA BIN LADEN?

I changed the number on my sign every morning since the first day I put it up nearly 8 and 1/2 years ago. When I went on vacation, (or on an unexpected journey to the hospital after my recent accident), my wonderful neighbours changed the number for me. The sign had become sort of iconic in my funky artist's neighbourhood, and my neighbours were very supportive of the message.

My sign was both a vigil and a daily protest. I asked the question because no one else was asking. I counted the days because it was unconscionable to me that this criminal was at large for so long. I deliberately made the simplest sign possible because I had one important question, and I didn't want anything to distract from it. For the last 9 years and 232 days no one in the mainstream press or in the criminal Bush administration seemed to care very much about the answer.

The phone started ringing on Sunday night and it didn't stop for days. My wonderful neighbours helped me take my sign down on Monday morning. I had no idea at the time that it was about to become part of the mainstream media coverage of bin Laden. Some reporters called first, but many just showed up and knocked on my door. ALL DAY. And all day Tuesday, too. Interviews and pictures of my sign ended up in at least 6 newspapers including the NY Times, and some radio and television spots as well. I was sorely tempted to ask all those reporters where they had been for the last 9 years and 232 days, but I decided to stay on-point instead.

The recent accident that sent me to the hospital was quite serious, (18 broken bones including a shattered pelvis that needed 8 hours of surgery to rebuild), and I worked my butt off to get 'paroled' from the rehab facility on Saturday. Yay for me. DAMN, it's good to be home! I'm just so very glad that I was home in time to take my sign down on Monday morning. I think I would have chewed my arm off in frustration had I still been incarcerated in rehab. The really good thing that came out of all this is that my simple sign, with all it's cracks and peeling paint, is going to the permanent collection of the 9/11 Museum which will open in the basement of the new WTC in 2012.

(On a personal note, I have to say that I'm NOT AT ALL HAPPY to have had so many published pictures of me on crutches and wearing my hideous white plastic clamshell body brace and one unnaturally swollen thigh. Ugh.)

There's been a great deal of soul searching about what it means to rejoice over bin Laden's death. Some have been arguing that his demise makes no real difference. I wish more people would remember that this is about criminal justice. I don't celebrate in the streets when any other murderer is captured, and I have no illusions that taking one murderer off the street will end all crime. Criminal justice is about holding each person responsible for their crimes. The person who murdered 3,000 of my neighbours and changed my city forever is no longer at large. There will be other mass murderers, but this was about one man and his crimes. My question was answered. I'm happy to have been able to take down my sign.

Martina 05-06-2011 12:00 AM

Wow! Thank you for sharing that, Cheryl!

AtLast 05-06-2011 01:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CherylNYC (Post 333779)
Apologies in advance. I normally read all the way through a thread before I post, but I'm on painkillers due to an accident, and I just don't have enough continuity of thought at this time. I confess to having merely skimmed this thread, but I wanted to post my experiences here, anyway.

I live in a Brooklyn neighbourhood notable for it's Lower Manhattan views. Every time I see my amputated skyline I still don't recognise it, even nearly 10 years later. The attacks of 9/11 changed my city in so many ways I can't begin to name them, and none of those changes were positive. I didn't personally lose anyone in those attacks, but I lost my city as I knew it, and I took it all very personally.

I've been following bin Laden's career in terrorism since early in the Clinton administration. He was responsible for a great many horrible crimes. I knew instantly that he was responsible for the attacks of 9/11 since they bore his signature style. Like many, I rolled my eyes at Bush Jr's cowboy rhetoric following the attack, ("You can run, but you can't hide." Remember?), but I actually expected him to follow through on that promise. Silly me.

I was disgusted and appalled when it became increasingly obvious over the next year that Bush had no intention of capturing Osama bin Laden, and was instead using our loss as a pretext to attack Iraq, a country that had never attacked us. Sure, Saddam Hussein was a bad guy, but he wasn't the bad guy who attacked us. That bad guy was laughing his ass off at us while we spent our resources and precious young lives chasing his sworn enemy, Saddam Hussein. And we looked like a bunch of ignorant bigots who couldn't tell one Arab from another. I saw the failure to capture bin Laden as a clear issue of criminal justice. I became increasingly horrified that my money was about to be used to wage an illegal and immoral war, so I did the only thing I could think of.

Almost a year and a half after 9/11 I put up a sign in front of my house. It was a day-counter that asked one simple question. This past Sunday night my sign read:

9 years, 232 days since 9/11/01

WHERE IS OSAMA BIN LADEN?

I changed the number on my sign every morning since the first day I put it up nearly 8 and 1/2 years ago. When I went on vacation, (or on an unexpected journey to the hospital after my recent accident), my wonderful neighbours changed the number for me. The sign had become sort of iconic in my funky artist's neighbourhood, and my neighbours were very supportive of the message.

My sign was both a vigil and a daily protest. I asked the question because no one else was asking. I counted the days because it was unconscionable to me that this criminal was at large for so long. I deliberately made the simplest sign possible because I had one important question, and I didn't want anything to distract from it. For the last 9 years and 232 days no one in the mainstream press or in the criminal Bush administration seemed to care very much about the answer.

The phone started ringing on Sunday night and it didn't stop for days. My wonderful neighbours helped me take my sign down on Monday morning. I had no idea at the time that it was about to become part of the mainstream media coverage of bin Laden. Some reporters called first, but many just showed up and knocked on my door. ALL DAY. And all day Tuesday, too. Interviews and pictures of my sign ended up in at least 6 newspapers including the NY Times, and some radio and television spots as well. I was sorely tempted to ask all those reporters where they had been for the last 9 years and 232 days, but I decided to stay on-point instead.

The recent accident that sent me to the hospital was quite serious, (18 broken bones including a shattered pelvis that needed 8 hours of surgery to rebuild), and I worked my butt off to get 'paroled' from the rehab facility on Saturday. Yay for me. DAMN, it's good to be home! I'm just so very glad that I was home in time to take my sign down on Monday morning. I think I would have chewed my arm off in frustration had I still been incarcerated in rehab. The really good thing that came out of all this is that my simple sign, with all it's cracks and peeling paint, is going to the permanent collection of the 9/11 Museum which will open in the basement of the new WTC in 2012.

(On a personal note, I have to say that I'm NOT AT ALL HAPPY to have had so many published pictures of me on crutches and wearing my hideous white plastic clamshell body brace and one unnaturally swollen thigh. Ugh.)

There's been a great deal of soul searching about what it means to rejoice over bin Laden's death. Some have been arguing that his demise makes no real difference. I wish more people would remember that this is about criminal justice. I don't celebrate in the streets when any other murderer is captured, and I have no illusions that taking one murderer off the street will end all crime. Criminal justice is about holding each person responsible for their crimes. The person who murdered 3,000 of my neighbours and changed my city forever is no longer at large. There will be other mass murderers, but this was about one man and his crimes. My question was answered. I'm happy to have been able to take down my sign.

Thank you so much for this post. And I hope you have a speedy recovery. This is an amazing story and the part about your neighbors is great.

CherylNYC 05-06-2011 08:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AtLastHome (Post 333783)
Thank you so much for this post. And I hope you have a speedy recovery. This is an amazing story and the part about your neighbors is great.

I feel very lucky to have such amazing neighbours. This part of NYC has recently become a popular destination, partly because of our reputation for being oddball artists likely to react creatively to events that affect us. Many of the marginal characters that give us such a strong flavor have not yet been driven out by gentrification. I so hope our new-found popularity doesn't unravel our remarkable community. Unfortunately, every time we're noted in the press, the social and economic pressure of gentrification gets ratcheted up yet another notch. Sigh.

Whoops! Derail over.

Diavolo 05-06-2011 08:23 AM

Cheryl, that was one of the best posts I've seen anywhere on the subject.

This stupid 24 hour news cycle we've adopted just exacerbates an already problematic situation. We, as a country, haven't educated the public and we don't even understand how badly it's affected our soul.

I spent a month working in the towers back in May 2001, but for the grace of God go I. I've studied the event, UBL and our reaction. I find this country's behavior lacking. We (as a country) thump Bibles but never actually read one. I spoke with a Jewish friend of mine about this yesterday and she had one of the best perspectives I've seen out here on the west coast. Full disclosure, she was born in Israel, raised in NYC and now lives in California. Her daughter lives in NYC today. She said no matter how heinous the crime, you cannot celebrate the death of another and leave your own soul intact. I think every thinking person can arrive at that same conclusion no matter their faith.

EnderD_503 05-06-2011 10:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AtLastHome (Post 333609)
Although I agree with the imperial nature the US has played all over the world and it is not something I am proud of- all Western nations have contributed to very disrespectful treatment of various regions and continue to.

While agree Western nations in general contributed, in this case I named the US in particular because of the role that nation has played in the Middle East (and worldwide) over the last few decades. Many other Western nations ride the line of imperialism, though it is no longer as prominent in other Western nations as it is in the US (as far as military action/intervention globally is concerned). I name the US in this instance because most Western powers were outright against the war in Iraq, but on the other hand supported the invasion of Afghanistan so they certainly are not wholely innocent.

What I find different though is the way other nations presented the invasion to the general population vs. the way the American people were addressed. For the Americans it seemed a blatant ideological war (or wars), while there was, as far as I have ever read, never any large degree of popular support for the "war on terror" in nations like Germany and France despite military participation in Afghanistan. I think it was also a media issue, in that there seems to be more diversity in information and perception presented by the media in other nations than the US, where it seems the mainstream media consistantly supported the war for many years (perhaps until recently). I think a big part of the problem is that the actions of the American government and military continue to act as an "us vs. them" issue for many Americans. It should have nothing to do with "othering" other nations and cultures the way many Americans do.

With Osama Bin Laden's death it continues to be presented as an "us vs. them." I have a big issue with that. When he was killed, I'm not sure I saw the British or the Spaniards reacting the same way as the Americans did, and while the death toll was not the same in those two nations, they did suffer attacks by fundamentalists.

Quote:

PS- I did see your mention on the Western powers involvement in Libya (UN). Sometimes I wonder if a strong multi-country aliance could be built among just people- and have some effect on all of these countries. An internation aliance with an understanding of how we all contribute to these insane acts against other countries. I knmow, I'm an idealist.
Yes, and I do want to make sure people understand that I'm not ignoring the role European powers in particular are playing in Libya now. I am completely against Western involvement in Libya. I am not against people attempting to liberate themselves from oppression, however, I am deeply concerned that Libya is on its way to unseating Qaddafi only to replace him with the Muslim Brotherhood (already looking like they might come into power in Egypt)...which is much, much worse. Swapping one dictator for another makes no difference, whether the deposers latch themselves onto non-extremists attempting to free themselves of a previous dictator or not.

In many respects it feels like Osama and US support for extremist "freedom fighters" in Afghanistan all over again, as though the West needs a new "demon" to fight and is in the process of creating one in Libya.

Overall, I have the same wish you do. I think that with social media like Twitter in particular it will become easier for people around the world to network and organize themselves into a coherent voice and social force more easily without the government middlemen interfering. Maybe that will make a difference, but again that may just be idealism.

As far as an international alliance, it is a pitty that Trotskyism is not as embraced as other forms of communism. I think the Trotskyist/ICL approach to creating that international community (albeit very small) fighting for the people as a whole without borders is excellent. If only it were on a larger scale.

P.S. sorry for snipping up your post :p

BullDog 05-06-2011 11:56 AM

Ender you make some good points, but all Americans have not reacted to the death of Bin Laden in the same way. You seem to be making some pretty big generalizations there.

Toughy 05-06-2011 04:20 PM

I thought Ender was talking about all those folks that were shown on CNN celebrating. I don't see the gross generalization other do.

Concerning celebrating the death of a mass murderer. Many folks in this country are revenge motivated and that's why they celebrated. Revenge was had........bin Laden shot in the head and dead. It's the same sort of revenge you see in the death penalty. An eye for an eye.....and we all end up blind.

I facilitate a group at the SF VA Medical Center....all veterans with 90% of them having been in combat (from Vietnam, Korea and up to today). I brought up bin Laden. Some folks might think a great cheer went up cuz we got him dead....after all this is a room full of combat warriors who wanted bin Laden dead....some had been in Afghanistan. There was silence and soft spokens words about justice. Someone even said he should have been captured and brought to trial in a US Federal Court .....not a military tribunal. S/he felt a civilian trial with a guilty verdict would in fact strengthen and show the US believes in it's Constitution and the rule of law. It really was basic police work that found him in that compound in Pakistan.

I personally don't think we can wage a war on terror with armies and drones and bombs. Terror is a tactic. To catch the leaders ordering this tactic requires good old fashioned boots on the ground police work. Police work and civilian courts brought justice with the first WTC bomber. I would expect the same thing can be repeated without killing people.

Martina 05-06-2011 06:04 PM

Re a previous post --

Public school education is not to blame for the ills of the world. Nor are teachers. It is harder to get credentialed than it has ever been. Coursework, testing and supervision are rigorous. Teachers are required to do a huge amount of professional development. And we are under more scrutiny and exposed to more criticism than ever before by groups who do not have a clue about what our working conditions are like.

And curriculum development? Huh? There are amazing curricula out there. The problem is right wing school boards and book publishers who pander to them. We are not the problem. We know our fields. We know our students. The people who think they know better are the problem.

Most teachers have Master's degrees. Many of us have more than one. It's not a career for idiots. And our students are not lacking in character. Young people are not the problem. Nor are the professionals, meaning fully credentialed ones, working with them. Why do people love to take potshots at teachers and young people? i do not understand why it is so gratifying. Maybe it relates to some fear. i do not know.

It is young people fighting these damned wars and dying in them, by the way. Often young people of color. They are not to be feared and despised. They are to be thanked.

Most of the people taking potshots at us would not be willing to spend an hour in my school with my students, much less dedicate their careers to working with them. And these are the kids most likely to go to the military and most likely to serve in dangerous areas.

FlowerFem 05-09-2011 10:01 AM

Obama said, "anyone who questions whether the terrist mastermind didn't desrve his fate needs their head examined." Ouch! Anyone in here know agood head examiner?

atomiczombie 06-01-2011 10:11 AM

Here's a GREAT article from Noam Chomsky about the killing of Bin Laden and how it broke all sorts of international laws. I just had to share it with you all.


Quote:

The Revenge Killing of Osama bin Laden
Tuesday 31 May 2011
by: Noam Chomsky, Truthout


The May 1 U.S. attack on Osama bin Laden’s compound violated multiple elementary norms of in ternational law, beginning with the in vasion of Pakistani territory.

There appears to have been no attempt to apprehend the unarmed victim, as presumably could have been done by the 79 commandos facing almost no opposition.

President Obama announced that “justice has been done.” Many did not agree – even close allies. British barrister Geoffrey Robertson, who generally supported the operation, nevertheless described Obama’s claim as an “absurdity” that should have been obvious to a former professor of constitutional law.

Pakistani and international law require inquiry “whenever violent death occurs from government or police action,” Robertson points out. Obama undercut that possibility with a “hasty ‘burial at sea’ without a post mortem, as the law requires.”

“It was not always thus,” Robertson usefully reminds us, "When the time came to con sider the fate of men much more steeped in wickedness than Osama bin Laden – namely the Nazi leadership – the British government wanted them hanged within six hours of capture.

“President Truman demurred, citing the conclusion of Justice Robert Jackson (chief prosecutor at the Nuremberg trial) that summa ry execution ‘would not sit easily on the American conscience or be remembered by our children with pride ... the only course is to deter mine the innocence or guilt of the accused after a hearing as dispassionate as the times will permit and upon a record that will leave our reasons and motives clear.”’

An other perspective on the attack comes in a report in The Atlantic by veteran Middle East and military correspondent Yochi Dreazen and colleagues. Citing a “senior U.S. official,” they conclude that the bin Laden killing was a planned assassination.

“For many at the Pentagon and the Central Intelligence Agency who had spent nearly a decade hunting bin Laden, killing the militant was a necessary and justified act of vengeance,” they write. Further more, “capturing bin Laden alive would have also presented the administration with an array of nettlesome legal and political challenges.”

They quote former West German Chancellor Helmut Schmidt, who commented that “the U.S. raid was ‘quite clearly a violation of international law’ and that bin Laden should have been detained and put on trial.”

They contrast Schmidt with U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, who “defended the decision to kill bin Laden al though he didn’t pose an immediate threat to the Navy SEALs,” and testified to Congress that the assault had been “lawful, legitimate and appropriate in every way.”

They observe further that the assassination is “the clearest illustration to date” of a crucial distinction between the Bush and Obama counter terror policies. Bush captured suspects and sent them to Guantanamo and other camps, with con sequences now well known. Obama’s policy is to kill suspects (along with “collateral damage”).

The roots of the revenge killing are deep. In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, the American desire for vengeance displaced concern for law or security.

In his book, “The Far Enemy,” Fawaz Gerges, a leading academic specialist on the jihadi movement, found that “the dominant response by jihadis to Sept. 11 is an ex plicit rejection of al-Qaida and total opposition to the internationalization of jihad ... Al-Qaida united all social forces (in the Muslim world) against its global jihad.”

The influential Lebanese cleric Sheikh Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah sharply condemned al-Qaida’s 9/11 atrocities on priccipled grounds. “We must not punish in dividuals who have no relationship with the American administration or even those who have an indirect role,” he said.

Fadlallah was the target of a CIA-organized assassina tion operation in 1985, a huge truck bomb placed outside a mosque. He escaped, but 80 others were killed, mostly women and girls, as they left the mosque – one of those in numerable crimes that don’t enter the ann als of terror.

Subsequent U.S. actions, particularly the invasion of Iraq, gave new life to al-Qaida.

What are the likely consequences of the killing of bin Laden? For the Arab world, it will probably mean little. He had long been a fading presence, and in the past few months was eclipsed by the Arab Spring.

A fairly general perception in the Arab world is captured by the headline in a Lebanese newspaper: “The execution of bin Laden: A settling of accounts between killers.”

The most immediate and significant consequences are likely to be seen in Pakistan. There is much discussion of Washington’s anger that Pakistan didn’t turn over bin Laden. Less is said about the fury in Pakistan that the U.S. invaded their territory to carry out a political assassination.

Pakistan is the most dangerous country on Earth, with the fastest-growing nuclear arsenal. The revenge killing on Pakistani soil only stoked the anti-American fervor that had long been building. In his new book, “Pakistan: A Hard Country,” Anatol Lieven writes that “if the U.S. ever put Pakistani soldiers in a position where they felt that honor and patriotism required them to fight America, many would be very glad to do so.”

And if Pakistan collapsed, an “absolutely inevitable result would be the flow of large numbers of highly trained ex-soldiers, including explosive experts and engineers, to extremist groups.”

The primary threat is leakage of fissile materials to jihadi hands, a horrendous eventuality.

The Pakistani military has already been pushed to the edge by U.S. attacks on Pakistani sovereignty. One factor is the drone attacks in Pakistan that Obama escalated immediately after the killing of bin Laden, rubbing salt in the wounds.

But there is much more, including the demand that the Pakistani military cooperate in the U.S. war against the Afghan Taliban. The overwhelming majority of Pakistanis see the Taliban as fighting a just war of resistance against an invading army, according to Lieven.

The killing of bin Laden could have been the spark that set off a conflagration, with dire consequences, particularly if the invading force had been compelled to fight its way out, as was anticipated.

Perhaps the assassination was perceived as an “act of vengeance,” as Robertson concludes. Whatever the motive, it could hardly have been security.

© 2011 Noam Chomsky
What's really disturbing is how dangerous our relationship with Pakistan is already, and now we go and invade their country to commit murder. And our own CIA committed an act of terror by blowing up a mosque! Our government is as much of a terrorist as al Qaida. *shakes head*

AtLast 06-01-2011 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toughy (Post 334111)
I thought Ender was talking about all those folks that were shown on CNN celebrating. I don't see the gross generalization other do.

Concerning celebrating the death of a mass murderer. Many folks in this country are revenge motivated and that's why they celebrated. Revenge was had........bin Laden shot in the head and dead. It's the same sort of revenge you see in the death penalty. An eye for an eye.....and we all end up blind.

I facilitate a group at the SF VA Medical Center....all veterans with 90% of them having been in combat (from Vietnam, Korea and up to today). I brought up bin Laden. Some folks might think a great cheer went up cuz we got him dead....after all this is a room full of combat warriors who wanted bin Laden dead....some had been in Afghanistan. There was silence and soft spokens words about justice. Someone even said he should have been captured and brought to trial in a US Federal Court .....not a military tribunal. S/he felt a civilian trial with a guilty verdict would in fact strengthen and show the US believes in it's Constitution and the rule of law. It really was basic police work that found him in that compound in Pakistan.

I personally don't think we can wage a war on terror with armies and drones and bombs. Terror is a tactic. To catch the leaders ordering this tactic requires good old fashioned boots on the ground police work. Police work and civilian courts brought justice with the first WTC bomber. I would expect the same thing can be repeated without killing people.

Your post reminds me of many of our Generals (one is Clin Powel's past comments) speaking about war. So many of the docs I have watched that focus on our individual troops in these wars always strike me in much the same way- the deep level of humanity of those that are out there trying to bridge relationships with the people in a country we are in on an everyday basis without shooting up small villages and towns.

Sometimes I see a huge disconnect between those that have been or are in the actual conflict and we at home that have never been there. Yes, I know there are shoot 'em up soldiers, but, so many seem to see how diplomacy would just go farther in bringing positive change- earning trust of the people that are in the middle of so much chaos and that have had any number of agressors throughout time in their backyards.

I view bin Laden as a sociopathic religious zealot with the same kind of charisma as people like Hitler. One like so many that has followers that have such desperate circumstances that I know I cannot begin to understand.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:01 PM.

ButchFemmePlanet.com
All information copyright of BFP 2018