Jump to content

Osama bin Laden DEAD


Recommended Posts

Bin Laden directed, but few seemed to listen

As an aging Osama bin Laden issued grand orders, few Al Qaeda operatives acted upon them

cbsnews.com

There is no dispute that bin Laden spent time in his lair dreaming up ways to kill Americans in great numbers again, for the terrorist believed that only mass casualties could move U.S. policy. Communicating both with his core group and al Qaeda affiliates, he advised plots against cities spared on Sept. 11, 2001, such as Los Angeles, and wanted to explore attacking trains.

Whatever the target, he sought a body count of thousands, the records indicate.

But not everyone was marching to his drum.

The Yemen branch of al Qaeda, which now overshadows bin Laden's central operation as the organization's top money-raising, propaganda and operational arm, has embraced the smaller-scale attacks that bin Laden thought were unsuccessful. Others in the network, too, have urged the likeminded to kill Americans wherever and however they can, without coordination or elaborate planning.

So far intelligence officials have not identified specific targets or plots for coming attacks in their initial analysis of the 100 or so flash drives and five computers that the assault team took from the compound. Nor have they found that bin Laden was capable of coordinating the timing of attacks across the various al Qaeda affiliates in Pakistan, Yemen, Algeria, Iraq and Somalia.

Edited by Silver Rider
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 737
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

There's nothing wrong with being an atheist. Just like there's nothing wrong with being a Christian, or a Jew, or a Muslim, or a Hindu, or a Buddhist, or a Zoroastrian, or whatever other denomination you choose to follow. The non-belief in a God/Gods is just as valid a course of life as a belief in a God/Gods. Life would suck if everyone was the same. My atheism doesn't make me less of a person than someone who has some kind of religious faith, and people who have faith are not less of a person to me.

So I'm not sure what your point was.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really Steve. She believes God doesn't exist.

Exactly, Babs. Just because she doesn't believe the same thing as Steve, doesn't mean she doesn't believe in anything.

If anything, I've found Athiests to have more well thought-out convictions than Christians. Most Christians I've encountered simply believe what they believe because they've been going to church their whole life and are simply subscribing to their parents' religion. Athiests tend to come to their beliefs in adulthood, after having gone to church their whole life, and after reasoned thought and analysis come to disagree. It comes down to whether you favor faith or logic - Christians say you have to ignore the logic and simply have faith. Athiests believe that logic transcends faith in the illogical.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's nothing wrong with being an atheist. Just like there's nothing wrong with being a Christian, or a Jew, or a Muslim, or a Hindu, or a Buddhist, or a Zoroastrian, or whatever other denomination you choose to follow. The non-belief in a God/Gods is just as valid a course of life as a belief in a God/Gods. Life would suck if everyone was the same. My atheism doesn't make me less of a person than someone who has some kind of religious faith, and people who have faith are not less of a person to me.

So I'm not sure what your point was.

:goodpost:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw a great bumper sticker the other day. It read: "OSAMA BIN LADEN SLEEPS WITH LUCA BRASI"

Welcome to the board, Brad.

Love the avatar and tag line. Always loved that movie. Especially, "Mr., if you don't shut up, I'm gonna shove 100% up your ass!" Classic! That's a great bumper sticker!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually Danny you said America. If you wish to call my answer excuses, do what thou wilt. The youth of America comment was a general statement, not intended for an answer to your question. The rest of your point is a concoction of whatever issue you are caring around in your head. You are trying to blame America, (and now all of a sudden, it's citizens) for a terrorist group that you feel Americans funded. Can't help you with that Dan. Honestly, I cannot be held responsible to give you factual answers, just my opinion. So it remains the same, the US government did not support the IRA. Best I can do Danny. While I won't say it's the most far fetched statement you are making, I just don't see any truth in it other than your misguided conviction to point a finger.

I am not Irish, so I have no idea what they are proud of. It's a term used by Irish people. It's my understanding they did not get along with your Country...Not sure why, as everyone else has always gotten along so well with your Country in the past. :unsure:

Also, I take no offence to your personal jabs because I realize some need to act this way to compensate for lack of self esteem.

I will say this, you have excellent taste in music!

Regards

Hi MrZoso,

I did say "America" and by that I mean the people not the government, although your government let it happen and procured arms through the CIA, to answer the rest I would point you towards my signature.

The Catholic Irish population of Northern Ireland had everyright to defend their communities when they were attacked by the Protestans of Northern Ireland. The British sent in the Army to safeguard the Catholics and from then on it were wrong, both sides were to blame but maybe the British Government were the most to blame as they should have known that those two communities would never get along in a million years.

The only way to keep the peace in Northern Ireland is to either give it back to Southern Ireland, something that the Southern Irish do not want because of the finantial implications of how much it would cost in social security payments, or expel all the Catholics to the south.

The Catholics lost all credibility when their "self defence" turned in to mass murder, and I lay some of the blame squarely at the door of Irish Americans their Government and their security forces, and thats why I am so passionate at letting Americans know that Terrorism started way before 9/11 and in some ways they helped to fuel it.

Thats my position and where I stand.

Regards, Danny

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi MrZoso,

I did say "America" and by that I mean the people not the government, although your government let it happen and procured arms through the CIA, to answer the rest I would point you towards my signature.

The Catholic Irish population of Northern Ireland had everyright to defend their communities when they were attacked by the Protestans of Northern Ireland. The British sent in the Army to safeguard the Catholics and from then on it were wrong, both sides were to blame but maybe the British Government were the most to blame as they should have known that those two communities would never get along in a million years.

The only way to keep the peace in Northern Ireland is to either give it back to Southern Ireland, something that the Southern Irish do not want because of the finantial implications of how much it would cost in social security payments, or expel all the Catholics to the south.

The Catholics lost all credibility when their "self defence" turned in to mass murder, and I lay some of the blame squarely at the door of Irish Americans their Government and their security forces, and thats why I am so passionate at letting Americans know that Terrorism started way before 9/11 and in some ways they helped to fuel it.

Thats my position and where I stand.

Regards, Danny

Good post Danny. I respect your opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would have been nice if they could have just arrested him. But I guess it was self defense in that highly risky situation. He was too much of a danger to just let him go, so they continued in their pursuit. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

SCO Says Bin Laden's Death May Spur Terrorism

16 May 2011Reuters

themoscowtimes.com

ALMATY, Kazakhstan — The killing of Osama bin Laden by U.S. special forces might trigger a backlash from his supporters and a "new wave of terror" across Central Asia, the Russia- and China-dominated Shanghai Cooperation Organization said.

"The recent elimination of terrorist No. 1 Osama bin Laden is beyond all doubt a success of the United States, but it is in no way a victory over international terrorism," Kazakh Foreign Minister Yerzgan Kazykhanov told a meeting Saturday of his counterparts from the SCO states. Kazakhstan currently holds the rotating chair of the NATO-style grouping.

(May 2 was Monday.)

On May 2, 2011, around 01:00 Pakistan Standard Time, Osama bin Laden was shot and killed by U.S. Navy SEALs in Abbottabad, Pakistan. Within 24 hours of his death he was buried at sea. He was 54 years old.

Sources: The White House · Guardian UK · Reuters . answers.com

Edited by Silver Rider
Link to post
Share on other sites

Northern Ireland is a failed political entity requiring change and the sooner both sides accept that the better for everyone.

There are more than 2 sides to that conflict.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Bin Laden town hopes for bumper tourism

smh.com.au

Edited by Silver Rider
Link to post
Share on other sites

So I'm to understand Irish Americans, the United States government & their security forces (?) are to blame in part for the troubles? Dan, the origins of the troubles date back to the 16th century - the United States didn't even exist! It's undoubtedly true some Irish Americans have provided moral and financial support to boths sides of the political conflict, but that neither mandates nor equates to terrorism. Blame for the terrorist tactics that have been employed should be placed squarely where it belongs - on the people who engage in it. Northern Ireland is a failed political entity requiring change and the sooner both sides accept that the better for everyone.

Hey you know what, Good post Steve. I also respect your opinion. I am learning a lot here... ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure how that could in any way be equal friend?

I hadn't read this whole thread until just now, but I feel that within the context of the many thousands of innocent people Bin Laden ordered killed, and the many more that he would have ordered killed, it was a great moral victory to kill him by any means. President Obama made the correct call on this one, and we should all be thankful for the outcome.

Just my opinion.

Sorry, I've bowed out of this "discussion," and most others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course but the bottom line is nationalists vs. unionists.

There is also a neutral element.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Gunmen kill Saudi consular employee

investors.com

KARACHI, Pakistan, May 16, 2011 (UPI via COMTEX) -- Gunmen in Pakistan's port city of Karachi fired on a Saudi Arabian consulate vehicle Monday, killing an occupant, police said.

The identity of the victim was not immediately known nor how many people were in the vehicle.

China's Xinhua news agency, quoting police, said the victim was the vehicle's driver.

Geo News quoted a Saudi Embassy media section official as saying the victim, a diplomat, was killed in a drive-by shooting near the consulate. The report said another official earlier identified the victim as a security official.

The incident occurred near the consulate in the country's largest city which has been wracked for months by political, ethnic and sectarian violence, leaving hundreds dead.

Last week, the Saudi consulate was attacked by some motor cyclists who tossed two grenades at the facility. No one was injured in that incident.

No one had yet claimed responsibility for the Monday incident.

It comes in the wake of the May 2 killing by U.S. forces of al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden in the Pakistani garrison town of Abbottabad, northeast of Islamabad. Militants have vowed to avenge his death.

Edited by Silver Rider
Link to post
Share on other sites

So I'm to understand Irish Americans, the United States government & their security forces (?) are to blame in part for the troubles? Dan, the origins of the troubles date back to the 16th century - the United States didn't even exist! It's undoubtedly true some Irish Americans have provided moral and financial support to boths sides of the political conflict, but that neither mandates nor equates to terrorism. Blame for the terrorist tactics that have been employed should be placed squarely where it belongs - on the people who engage in it. Northern Ireland is a failed political entity requiring change and the sooner both sides accept that the better for everyone.

Hi Steve,

As you are Self Appointed Attorney for the Defence I put it to you then that Osama Bin Laden, if you put the same criteria to him would not be classed as a Terrorist, because he only supplied Money, Procured Arms, Provided the Perpertrators with the means of commiting Terrorist Attrocities, as far as I know he himself commited no terrorist attack against anyone but the USSR in Afghinistan,but neither you or I would want to do that would we?

I agree with you that the People who engager in those attrocities should be totally held responsable for their actions, but those who supplied Money, Weapons and Oppotunity and shielded those that partook in those attrocities must share some of it as well, that includes the Catholic and Protestant Population of Northern Ireland, the Catholic Population of Southern Ireland and the rest of the UK, the British Government, the US Government and some of its Security Forces and the Irish American Catholics who collected and gave money to the cause.

For anyone who wants to know or cares, neither Southern Ireland as well as the Northern Irish want, as they have been asked in a Referendum for Ireland to be United as one country, that was the democratic voice of both the South and the North, just in case anyone was under the wrong impression.

Regards, Danny

Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='SteveAJones' timestamp='1305543828' post='517767']

Dan, my point was moral and financial support to achieve political change is neither a mandate for terrorism nor does it equate to terrorism. You make it sound like Irish Americans are laundering money, shipping arms and rigging elections in Ireland. OBL was a terrorist because he sought to achieve political change in Saudi Arabia (overthrow the Saudi royal family) primarily through terrorism (murdering Americans, etc.).

For anyone who wants to know or cares, the majority population in Northern Ireland is not native Irish - they're descendants of Scottish Presbyterians deliberately put there to have exactly the effect that they have had and will continue to have. Consequently they represent the majority political opinion, which is pro-Union (with Great Britain). People in Northern Ireland do not want to unite with the south because of money, plain and simple. Sterling is far superior to the Euro at the moment and buildings, cars and taxes and medical care is also far superior in northern Ireland due to NHS and other well renowned medical services which are non existent in the south. I see little evidence to suggest those living in the south are opposed to a united Ireland, in fact I submit this is why there is a conflict.

Edited by BIGDAN
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...