What is your reaction to the death of Osama bin Laden?

Post Reply New Topic

Stop drooling.

ruveyn

Bin Laden was NOT a " CIA agent"....its been fairly well documented how Bin Laden utilized his OWN money from his familys construction wealth to set up his own organizational funding operation called the Makhtad Khadimat (sp). The CIA funded the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan in the 1980s but not the Arabs who came in. It was the Afghans who later on became the Taliban. BTW, its the same Taliban we are still negotiating with to surrender the Al-Qaeda operatives in their midst. All you need to do is read Steve Colls books about Afghanistan such as Ghost Wars and the Bin Ladens to understand the background.

Just couldn't care less.

"Osama bin Laden runs a front organization for the mujaheddin—Islamic freedom fighters rebelling against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. The CIA secretly backs the mujaheddin."

For more background information behind 9/11.

http://www.wanttoknow.info/9-11cover-up10pg

The Saudi Arabian government is financially supporting Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda and other extremist groups. After 9/11, the Bush Administration chooses not to confront the Saudi leadership over its support of terror organizations and its refusal to help in the investigation. [New Yorker, 10/22/01, more]

Notwithstanding the fact your source is a conspiracy website for 9/11 " truthers"..i will ignore that significant flawed source to go after the quote you mentioned...Nowhere in that quote does it disprove anything I said. I have already said the Mujahadeen was funded by the CIA, via the ISI. I also said Bin Laden supported the Mujahadeen...the connection your source fails to make is the LINK between Bin Laden and the CIA, which just isn't there. Bin Laden was very much anti-american in the 1980s and firmly in the Salafi islamic idealogy...he would never have taken U.S assistance for himself or his Arab mujahadeen. We ( The U.S) supported Abdul Azzam and other Afghan tribal leaders. Now, is it possible that CIA funds via the ISI (pakistans intelligence agency) got into the hands of Arab fundmentalists? sure..but that doesnt mean the intent was there or it was covered up somehow.

OK I have read some bad sources providing false information and background on Bin Laden. I have no idea about his background. He was a mysterious Ghost of a character. A huge investor of organised Arabic terrorism/freedom fighters.

Actually, thee is quite a bit of legitimate information about Bin Laden out there. Coming from one of the most prominent families in Saudi Arabia, his history is hardly shadowy, till he chose to make himself shadowy in later life.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

I'm indifferent. I don't like the way some people are celebrating his death though.

I said Indifferent, but I was thinking of saying Other.

I found the whole thing sad. Sad that it proves most human beings deep down believe one bad turn does deserve another, and sad because it's just more death when it comes down to it. Also, I think it's likely 9/11 was not even a terrorist attack but murder done by some people inside our own country. the whole raid seems fishy as well im not even sure it's true.

"The essence of propaganda consists in winning people over to an idea so sincerely, so vitally, that in the end they succumb to it utterly and can never escape from it." Goebbels

What has Osama done since 9/11? Made videos oh no!! Its not like killing this man will end the war.

I think Bin Laden should have been captured then put on trail. As Bin Laden is dead, this will hopefully help Obama's re-election.

That's what I'm hoping for.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

I agree with you there. I was quite shocked and disgusted that people were celebrating. And I was surprised by the hypocrisy of "Christian" people saying how great it was that he had been killed. There is a passage in the bible saying it is wrong to celebrate the misfortune of your enemy. (I'm not a Christian, I've just read a lot of different kinds of religious texts)

And I also think it was wrong they killed him, he was unarmed, surely it was not necessary to kill him...unless they didn't and he's still alive so they can torture him and question him. They've lied about plenty of other stuff, so why not in this instance?

I was going to vote "indifferent", then decided an explanation may be in order.

There are so many things to say about so many things that are involved in this whole convoluted situation (which I have now had cause to think in depth about), and I have a tendency to expound on things until people's eyes bleed, so I'll just try to touch on (in my opinion) the most glaringly obvious issues.

Starting with 9/11 - it is a fact that planes were flown into buildings (and the ground) resulting in the deaths of people who by all accounts were innocent of being involved in this act. They had done nothing to deserve involvement in this action, all they had done was board planes and/or go to work (including all the fire fighters and police officers who died doing their jobs that day). Regardless of who caused these events to occur - OBL as the "MASTERMIND", the "soldiers" that actually carried out the act, the lack of security in our own country that allowed these things to proceed - ordinary, uninvolved people became casualties of a war. This is wrong. But it is no different that what we have been doing to many in the Arab countries for years. We have been killing their innocent civilians, their women and children, for much longer than anyone really knows, and I'm sure the numbers of dead we have accumulated are MUCH more than 3000. I am in no way excusing what happened on 9/11, it was wrong. But who are we to throw stones.

Has anyone actually read a transcript of OBL's 2004 speech? It is hard to argue with. The man was educated, well spoken, and rational. It again comes down to - what would we have done, what would we have felt, if the shoe was on the other foot? Imagine the outrage and demands for blood, for retaliation, how the majority of the population would consider the attacker "evil" and devote their lives to revenge, or to a war to fight for their right to simply be left alone. We are occupying their countries, controlling their lives, dictating whether they live or die, whether they eat or starve. Why? Because they are a "threat"? Because they have WoMD? Where are they then? Its been over a decade that we have terrorizing these people, supposedly out of "self defense" or "pre-emptive retaliation". That’s a bunch of bull. We (being the US government) want control and we want their oil. We are the ones who have been committing mass genocide against these people, and they had had enough.

When religion enters the picture, accountability and societal rules go away. If we believe what has been fed to us by the mass media (and I'm not saying all of it is wrong), then these people, these Muslims, want every single person who does not plaster their forehead to the ground in honor of Allah, to die horrible bloody deaths. The Christians stand back and shake their heads, and proclaim them to be evil, a religion of satan. The Muslims say the same about the Christians, and each is so utterly convinced of the truth of their teachings that they think the other does not deserve to exist. Granted, the Koran does seem to promote violence on a much broader scale than the Bible does. It is not, however, limited to white Americans like most people think. They (Muslims) kill each other regularly over religious infractions. Beheadings and stonings are still common. A woman can be camel whipped in public if the Mata'whain catch her inadvertently or otherwise exposing ANY skin. This is their culture, it is what they know, how they live, and a part of their history. We should leave them to it. They see our way of life every bit as wrong and evil, as stupid and brutal as we see theirs. TO EACH THEIR OWN - if (and I say IF) - they are not posing a direct threat to us, we need to get out and leave them be. We have our own problems in our own country. On another note, what was the response in America after 9/11? A banding together, an unprecedented surge of patriotism, and uniting against a common enemy. Americans fed off of each others outrage, and created a self reinforcing, snowballing wave of righteousness. What happened the night the president announced that "we got him", that OBL was dead? The same exact thing. The American people united against a common enemy. This caused the government to look good, and it benefited most people in an emotional way. Both of these events were to the benefit of the American government. Just a thought.

I do believe in self defense. If someone walks up to me and says "I do not agree with the color of your shirt, I believe you are the devil for wearing that shirt, and I am going to kill you", and then makes a move to act out against me, I will absolutely act in defense of myself to whatever level is reasonable and necessary, up to and including deadly force, without a qualm. I have a right to exist. In that case, the threat was clear, immediate, and left no question in my mind as to the identity of the perpetrator, and that person's intent. In that situation, I believe self defense is more than reasonable. If the person was to succeed in harming me, and then flee - I believe I would be justified in seeking that person out and causing them to answer for/pay for the act that had been committed against me. Some people say that an eye for an eye is a destructive practice that will never allow us peace, but I counter that if there are no consequences (that at least match the severity of the infraction), that "society" will devolve into chaos. There will be no reason to follow rules, no reason to obey laws. Social protocol will be null in void. The human mind and resulting society is so fragile. Fear of consequences is a healthy part of modern civilization. That being said, we, as the American public, were led to believe that a certain Muslim man - OBL - had slaughtered 3000 of our peers without thought, provocation, or reason. Just simply for the joy of killing, as dictated by his religion. That we had done nothing to deserve this heinous act, and must act immediately in defense of our nation and avenge our people against these mindless, bloodthirsty, reasonless murderers. I say hold the mirror up, Washington. If OBL had done a public address and said something to the effect of "I don't like your shirt, you must die because your shirt is evil", that would be one thing. Then, I believe we would hav e been justified in going after him. But he did not. Quite the opposite. He asked us over and over and over for years before 9/11, to stop raping his lands and killing his people, or he would be forced to act in retaliation/defense. Google "OBL 2004 speech transcript" and read it if you don't believe me.

Anyway....the question being, how do I feel about his death? I go back and forth between sickened by the entire thing, and not really caring. If does not affect me in any personal way. I do not agree with most of human "civilization" and the ridiculous things they do, for the ridiculous reasons that they dream up with which to do them.

I've now thought way too much about this, and am going to retreat to my mountaintop for some peace and quiet, where there are no humans to agitate me.

This has just been my opinion, take it or leave it I am not attempting to influence anyone else to my way of thinking, nor am I arguing that "I am right". Who knows. It is what it is.