Author: mechanic

OBL's Death -- Did it Happen the way the Anglos Said? [Copy link] 中文

Rank: 1

Post time 2011-5-6 21:13:42 |Display all floors
Originally posted by blueskies88 at 2011-5-6 18:50
clever screen name -- do you think you are telling me something I don't know?

Get out of this thread and come into my spider trap and we can discuss it at length!

Left a message for everyone  ...


sure you know it , not sure you own the fact americans started the mess :)

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2011-5-7 01:33:38 |Display all floors

Jihad was called by whom, radical Islamic Coward? Almost as stupid

as you look, right?

Why not give us all your Skype address, as you are so brave?

Hahahahahahahahahahaaaaa!

DUH!

To change the way of things?

You don't start by abuse, did you know? Dead-end tract!

Maybe you don't!

You can train an animal to fear you

but when a certain crucial time comes, they will abandon you!

That goes for everyone who wants to change things and for those power brokers of the world, right now!

The power brokers, through their political puppets, their crooked markets, insurance and finance scams are making huge mistakes due mostly to their self-inflated sense of superiority, demonstrating disdain and lack of care! One day, their crocodile will snap, turn and bite their heads off!

Don't walk a crocodile on a leash and snap it with a whip!



And for the radical Islamic fundamentalists -- what do you offer? Cave man subservience!

And how do you think you are going to achieve it? With abusive intimidation? You may intimidate and fool yourself because of the cowardice of your nature, but you cannot break one who has already known real LOVE!
The Brotherhood of Knights of the Mystic Sea

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2011-5-7 07:35:05 |Display all floors

Can we believe anything these uncivilized savages say?

Blackout in US bin Laden oper. exposed
Fri May 6, 2011 12:53AM


US President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden (far left), Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and members of the national security team may not have been watching the mission unfold as they gathered in The White House Situation Room.
The head of the CIA has revealed that there was no live footage of the main part of the operation that killed Osama bin Laden, contradicting earlier reports that the US president was watching the action.


CIA Director Leon Panetta stated on Thursday that there was a 25-minute video blackout during the raid on the fortified compound owned by the al-Qaeda chief and that the US President Barack Obama and his national security aides had little knowledge of what was happening during the 38 minutes of the US special forces' operation on Pakistani soil, the Daily Telegraph reported.

This is while a photograph of Obama, Vice President Joe Biden and Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, along with defense staff and national security aides in the Situation Room was released by the White House, appearing to show them anxiously watching as the mission unfolded.

"Once those teams went into the compound I can tell you that there was a time period of almost 20 or 25 minutes where we really didn't know just exactly what was going on. And there were some very tense moments as we were waiting for information," the director of the CIA said in an interview with PBS.

"We had some observation of the approach there, but we did not have direct flow of information as to the actual conduct of the operation itself as they were going through the compound." Panetta added.

He went on to say that it was the US Navy Seals themselves who made the final decision to shoot bin Laden, rather than the US president.

"The authority here was to kill bin Laden. And obviously, under the rules of engagement, if he had in fact thrown up his hands surrendered and didn't appear to be representing any kind of threat, then they were to capture him. But they had full authority to kill him,” the CIA director noted.

On late Sunday, Obama claimed that Osama bin Laden was killed by US forces on May 1 in a hiding compound in Pakistan, resisting while unarmed. He added that the military mission was conducted without the knowledge of Pakistani authorities due to US mistrust of their purported South Asia ally.

The dilemma surrounding the "Geronimo" operation to capture the al-Qaeda chief has significantly deepened over the past few days amid conflicting reports about what really happened in his compound and why Pakistan's intelligence agencies were in the dark about the raid.

The skepticism deepened after Obama announced in a televised interview that he decided not to publish "disturbing imaged" of bin Laden's dead body to avert "a national security risk" and due to concerns that it might be used as a "propaganda tool."


=========================

COMMENTS:

Mumin:
They just make it up as they go along don't they! Such is the audacity of these lot, who realise all too well, that if they can get away with 9/11, then why shouldn’t they get away with every other farce they throw at us. The media doesn’t really care, nor do any investigative work to get to the bottom of any event, all they’ll do is just bark along with what the government throws at them, leaving the already scared public in an even greater state of confusion and bewilderment
No Virgin Girl in America

American can not live without SEX.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2011-5-7 08:01:32 |Display all floors

'Justice not done for unarmed bin Laden'

Fri May 6, 2011 11:29AM


Archbishop of Canterbury Dr. Rowan Williams says the killing of Osama bin Laden left a "very uncomfortable feeling" since he was unarmed at the time of his death.


The al-Qaeda leader was killed in his hideout in Pakistan in an operation by the US military forces. It was later acknowledged that bin Laden was unarmed when the US forces fired at him.

Lambeth Palace had formerly denied to issue a statement on bin Laden's death, but attending a press conference on Thursday, the archbishop answered the reporters' questions on the death of the long wanted man.

"I think the killing of an unarmed man is always going to leave a very uncomfortable feeling because it doesn't look as if justice is seen to be done," he said.

Regarding the US government's different versions of the death of bin Laden, Williams said, "In those circumstances I think it's also true that the different versions of events that have emerged in recent days have not done a great deal to help.”

"I don't know the full details any more than anyone else does. But I do believe that in such circumstances when we are faced with someone who was manifestly a war criminal in terms of the atrocities inflicted it is important that justice is seen to be served," he added.

Meanwhile, the archbishop of York has also expressed his concerns over the dramatic events in Pakistan, arguing that people should not “celebrate bin Laden's death” as the terrorist leader was "evil but not Satan."


=========================

COMMENT:

John Marsh
5/6/2011 11:44:57 AM
This story line exposed by the Archbishop is some where around the tenth version of this fictitious story line! In the first version the Brave Navy seals (dumb stupid animals) had a forty minute fire fight and Killed the armed Osama hiding behind his wife who he was using as a human shield. The man was innocent he has never been found guilty in a Court of Law apart from the fact he's been dead ten years from Renal failure. I wonder why they resurrected him AGAIN?
No Virgin Girl in America

American can not live without SEX.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2011-5-7 08:12:35 |Display all floors

Bin Laden dies; Does the cover-up live?

06.05.2011

In a previous Pravda.Ru article, Justice in America is a Lie (02/21/11), I explained how attorneys are trained to not only look at the immediate impact of a legal case or historical event, but also at the precedent that case or event might set.  As I said, "while some attorneys fight hard to prevent the ascendancy of bad precedents, others actually work to create them, knowing that once a door is slightly ajar it can easily be pushed open the rest of the way."

Because of this training, it has been difficult for me to join in the jubilation that has erupted in the wake of the assassination of Osama bin Laden.  This is in no way meant to imply that I am an apologist for bin Laden, and clearly if he committed the acts he was accused of a capital sentence would have been justified, even though, having witnessed firsthand the corruption of America's legal system, I continue to look askance at its use of the death penalty.

But a capital sentence is usually rendered after a trial is conducted and a guilty verdict returned.  But the killing of bin Laden means that no such trial will ever be conducted.  And this, of course, raises the question:  Why?

At the time of this writing, the circumstances surrounding bin Laden's death remain unclear.  Initially it was stated that he engaged in a shootout with American "Navy Seals."  Later it was reported that he was unarmed.  Naturally, not having been in the room when and where bin Laden was killed, it is impossible for me to say whether he was extrajudicially executed or not.

But, given the reports that he was unarmed, the circumstances seem to indicate that he was the target of an extrajudicial execution.  And while this has certainly inspired a copious amount of visceral satisfaction, if America's government can be cheered for conducting such an execution, then does this not also establish the precedent that the president of the United States can now extrajudicially execute anyone he/she chooses without ever giving the accused an opportunity to defend themselves in a court of law?

Also, since America is waging a "war on terror," would bin Laden not have been a more valuable asset alive than dead?  Now, not only did all the information he possessed die with him, his followers have his "martyrdom" to use as a recruitment tool.  While its effect might not be immediate, history has shown that the influence of one's "martyrdom" can actually increase with the passage of time, which means that bin Laden's death might serve as an inspiration to future generations of terrorists.

In addition, the fact that bin Laden was killed instead of captured will only magnify questions about the circumstances surrounding the attacks of September 11, 2001.  Many polls have indicated that a considerable number of Americans believe George W. Bush and his cronies were complicit in these attacks, with theories ranging from their planting explosives to destroy the World Trade Center and/or nearby buildings to their intentionally ignoring warnings about the planned attacks, so they could exploit the ensuing outrage to instigate the invasion of Iraq.

The actions of Bush and his fellow warmonger Dick Cheney did little to dispel these theories, and in fact did a significant amount to enhance them.  Bush rapidly shifted focus from bin Laden to Saddam Hussein as America's primary "enemy," and Cheney (dishonestly it turned out) endeavored to link Hussein to 9/11.

Now with bin Laden dead, new theories will abound that he was killed less for what he did, and more for what he knew and could expose about the events and people involved in the planning and execution of the 9/11 attacks.

These theories are also enhanced by the fact that America's current president, Barack Obama, has done everything in his power to ensure that the torturers and war criminals of the Bush administration never face justice, even going to the extent, as Wikileaks revealed, of pressuring foreign governments into not bringing torture or war crimes charges against them.

Decades ago, shortly after John F. Kennedy was killed in Dallas, the late civil-rights leader Malcolm X generated considerable controversy by calling the assassination an example of "the chickens coming home to roost."  But, like many controversial statements, this one contained some truth.

In the mid-1970s, the Church Committee revealed that the American government had assassinated or attempted to assassinate Patrice Lumumba (Congo), the Diem brothers (Vietnam), Che Guevara (South America), and Fidel Castro (Cuba).  In addition, the CIA helped orchestrate the coup that overthrew Salvador Allende, the democratically elected president of Chile, and replaced his government with a brutal and murderous military dictatorship.

The Church Committee also revealed that the FBI had attempted to provoke the "La Cosa Nostra [mafia]" into murdering comedian and civil-rights activist Dick Gregory and the leader of a Chicago street gang into murdering Black Panther leader Fred Hampton.

Yet Americans persist in applauding  assassinations when they happen to their "enemies," while abhorring them when they happen to their "friends."  But how does one choose which assassination to celebrate and which to mourn when their targets have essentially committed the same crimes?  What makes some acts "terrorism" and others "heroism," even when both result in the deaths of  thousands?  What makes one person subject to prosecution for war crimes, while others commit such crimes with impunity? What makes a tactic "torture" when used by one government, but "interrogation" when used by another?  And what is the value of "international law" when its enforcement is arbitrary and duplicitous?

Is it the race, religion or nationality of the victims and/or perpetrators?  Is it the fact that some atrocities have received a "seal of approval" from powerful governments or alliances like NATO?  Is it because only the losers of wars can become its criminals?  Or is it simply the reality that the more powerful the nation, the less accountable it is?

Imagine, if you will, a raid on a home not unlike bin Laden's.  The target is a man responsible for the deaths of over one hundred thousand people.  Highly trained military personnel seeking vengeance for these deaths are conducting the raid.  Their target, though unarmed, is nonetheless killed.

Surely, just as in the case of bin Laden, nobody would dispute that justice had been done.

Or would they?  What if the raid occurred on United States soil?  What if the raiders were former Iraqi soldiers?  And what if the target was George W. Bush?

Now I certainly am not advocating or endorsing such a raid.  But given the number of civilians these men killed for dishonest and/or self-serving reasons, is it any wonder that numerous countries throughout the world view the United States government as a proponent of double standards that incessantly believes its leaders are above the law?

But if a hypothetical isn't convincing enough, look at reality.  A few weeks ago, member nations of NATO, including the United States, began bombing Libya, ostensibly to prevent that nation's leader, Muammar Gaddafi, from committing atrocities against anti-government rebels.  Yet during this same period, the government of Bahrain has engaged in a draconian crackdown on anti-government protesters, and the government of Syria has killed hundreds of people engaged in similar protests.

Yet no NATO.  Why?  Apparently because the dictators of Bahrain and Syria are NATO friendly tyrants.

So, as I previously stated, I am no apologist for bin Laden.  But has anyone ever stopped to realize how many times leaders in democratic nations have used killing and/or the exploitation of death as a political weapon?  There is virtually no United States President who has not bloodied his hands in some war or conflict (domestic or international), and during the latter part of the last century the American government's killing of people in foreign nations for dubious reasons became so routine that, with the exception of Vietnam, American citizens now rarely even question why it's being done.

Which means that, in today's world, the more political power one struggles to gain, the more likely he/she is going to have to exploit killing or death to obtain it.

No wonder Jesus chose to bless the meek.

Since I opened this article with an observation about capital punishment, I will close by noting that the current governor of Texas, Rick Perry, who has often exploited death through his hardnosed support of capital punishment, has been aggressively attempting to cover-up the fact that he may have executed an innocent man, even going so far as to replace the leader of a commission assigned to investigate this execution with a political crony.

It should also be noted that several prominent individuals, the most recent being former UN nuclear inspector Mohamed ElBaradei, have suggested that George W. Bush and his cronies should face an international war crimes investigation for the "shame of a needless war" in Iraq.

Of course this will never happen.  Which brings me to my final thought-actually a question I cannot answer.  Will the myriad of "insulators" the politically or economically powerful use to excuse their double-standards, rationalize their crimes and/or evade justice have any impact on the Ultimate Judge once their time on earth is over?

Hopefully not.  Because they deserve the same fate that the New York Daily News recently wished upon bin Laden:  to "rot in hell."

David R. Hoffman
Legal Editor or Pravda.Ru
No Virgin Girl in America

American can not live without SEX.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2011-5-8 06:14:27 |Display all floors

Bin Laden videos fail to prove US claims

Sat May 7, 2011 6:4PM


A screen shot of the video released by the Pentagon on Saturday, May 07, 2011
Videos released by the Pentagon to allay uncertainty about circumstances of Osama bin Laden's death, fails to support US claim that the al-Qaeda leader was killed in Pakistan last week.


US President Barack Obama claimed that bin Laden was killed by US forces on May 1 in a hiding compound in Pakistan, resisting while unarmed.

Washington claims that during US raid last Monday, five videos were seized at the secret compound in Pakistan where bin Laden was hiding.

On Saturday the Pentagon released some of the videos in an attempt to quell doubts about bin Landen's death.

In the first home videos reportedly filmed in October or November 2010, bin Laden who is wearing a white skullcap and white robes, speaks to the camera in the style of his previous video messages.

There is no audio on the film, but Pentagon officials claim it was a message to the US.

In another video, bin Laden is seen watching a program about himself on Arabic language television.

There are no indications in the videos to prove that they were filmed in the secret compound where bin Laden was killed. The footages also fail to prove that the notorious al-Qaeda leader was alive until May 1.

Following Obama's announcement, a US official said that bin Laden's body was abruptly buried at sea, falsely boasting that his hasty burial was in accordance with the Islamic law, requiring burial within 24 hours of death.

However, burial at sea is not an Islamic practice and Islam does not specify a timeframe for burial.

US officials also claimed that their decision to give bin Laden a sea burial was made because no country would accept his remains, without elaborating on which countries were actually contacted on the matter.

Analysts, however, have raised serious questions as to why US officials did not allow for the application of a DNA test to officially confirm the identity of the corpse before the quick sea burial. Although officials claimed that DNA obtained from the body confirmed that he was actually Osama bin Laden.
No Virgin Girl in America

American can not live without SEX.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 4

Post time 2011-5-8 06:45:32 |Display all floors

European discomfort grows about bin Laden killing

By Fiona Ortiz and Erik Kirschbaum

MADRID/BERLIN | Wed May 4, 2011 1:55pm EDT

MADRID/BERLIN (Reuters) - European happiness with the death of Osama bin Laden was tempered on Wednesday by details showing he was unarmed when shot dead and qualms about whether torture of prisoners helped U.S. forces track him down.

Al Qaeda leader bin Laden -- the world's most wanted man -- was shot in the head in a U.S. special forces raid on his walled villa hideout in Pakistan on Monday.

In Germany and Spain, legislators questioned Chancellor Angela Merkel and Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero over their enthusiastic praise of U.S. President Barack Obama.

"It's likely that bin Laden sought his own destiny," Zapatero told parliament on Wednesday after Gaspar Llamazares, deputy from the small leftist party Izquierda Unida, questioned his congratulating Obama.

Zapatero said "any democrat" would have preferred bin Laden stood trial, but that he understood how the operation ended in the way it did for "one of history's bloodiest criminals."

Islamist militants set off bombs simultaneously in four packed commuter trains in Madrid in March 2004, killing 191 people and wounding more than 2,000, in attacks they said were inspired but not ordered by al Qaeda.

In Germany a senior member of parliament from Merkel's conservative Christian Democratic Union, Siegfried Kauder, criticized her statement on Monday which said she was "glad that killing bin Laden was successful".

"I wouldn't have used those words. That is a vengeful way of thinking that one shouldn't have. That's mediaeval," he said.

"A random killing is not permitted according to international agreements. If one concludes that bin Laden was no longer active (running al Qaeda operations around the world), the killing could be seen as random."

Defending the choices made by the troops who stormed bin Laden's compound in the early hours of Monday, the U.S. government's attorney-general, Eric Holder, said on Wednesday: "It was justified as an act of national self-defense."

He said bin Laden made no attempt to surrender. If he had done, that would have been accepted, he added.

WHY NO TRIAL?

Television and radio hosts zeroed in Washington's revision of certain details of the operation, such as the fact that bin Laden was not armed and that the woman killed had not been used as a shield, saying his death looked more now like an execution.

Speakers on a Spanish talk show questioned the official version of the burial at sea of bin Laden's body and said Obama's image would suffer among Europeans who would rather have seen a capture and trial.

Europeans also jumped into the renewed debate over torture and so-called enhanced interrogation technique after U.S. officials said key sources of initial information that led to bin Laden came from at least one prisoner that was tortured.

Many Europeans struggled to understand the open celebrations in the streets of New York and Washington earlier this week.

"While many nations suffered from al Qaeda's terrorism and few in the world will mourn bin Laden's death, the United States is the only place where it sparked spontaneous outpourings of raucous jubilation," wrote columnist Gary Younge in Britain's left-leaning Guardian newspaper.

"The initial euphoria in the United States may be quite difficult for people in Western Europe to take, but in one sense is understandable in the context. The 9-11 attacks were perhaps more visceral than most people expected. The impact on the United States was more deep-seated," said Paul Rogers, professor of Peace Studies at the University of Bradford.

Al Qaeda militants flew hijacked airliners into New York's World Trade Center and Washington's Pentagon building on September 11, 2001, killing nearly 3,000 people.

Some commentators said Obama could lose his luster in Europe, where he has been widely admired for taking a more multilateral, collaborative approach to foreign policy than his predecessor George W. Bush.

But the center-left French daily Le Monde said in an editorial that Obama had struck the right tone, saying he had announced the news in a sober speech, without sounding triumphant.

"Nothing of the ridiculous 'mission accomplished' of ... Bush, dressed as a fighter pilot, to proclaim in 2003 ... the U.S. 'victory' in Iraq," said le Monde.

Germany's Sueddeutsche Zeitung newspaper expressed misgivings about the legality of the killing.

"Which law covers the execution of bin Laden?" wrote Heribert Prantl, a senior editor at the left-leaning daily.

"U.S. law requires trials before death penalties are carried out. Executions are forbidden in countries based on rule of law. Martial law doesn't cover the U.S. operation either. The decision to kill the godfather of terror was political."

(Additional reporting by Mohammed Abbas and Avril Ormsby in London and Catherine Bremer in Paris; editing by Mark Heinrich)


http://www.reuters.com/article/2 ... USTRE74366D20110504

Use magic tools Report

You can't reply post until you log in Log in | register

BACK TO THE TOP
Contact us:Tel: (86)010-84883548, Email: blog@chinadaily.com.cn
Blog announcement:| We reserve the right, and you authorize us, to use content, including words, photos and videos, which you provide to our blog
platform, for non-profit purposes on China Daily media, comprising newspaper, website, iPad and other social media accounts.