The Execution of Osama Bin Laden

Post Reply New Topic

It is becoming increasingly evident that Bin Laden was deliberately executed, the lie that he was killed in self defence was torn to shreds within 24 hours of John Brennan's press conference, it has now come to light that he was captured and then killed in front of his family: Al Arabiya on Wednesday cited senior Pakistani security officials who said a 12-year-old daughter of Bin Laden who survived the attack and is in Pakistani custody told them the US forces captured her father alive and shot him dead in front of family members. If true this points to an extra legal killing, So why did the US give bin laden what he wanted, ie a martyrs death, surely they would have been better off dragging him back to to the US in chains putting him on trial and allowing all to see his virulent and delusional mind in open court, surely this would be the best way to demonise him I.E. let him discredit himself?? So why then execute him when by some eye witness accounts the US had him in custody. Could it be that the very last thing the US regime wanted was for Bin Laden to talk about the CIA involvement in so many shadowy deals regarding his time as a contractor for them in Afghanistan and who knows what else after.

I am not one for idiotic and largely unfounded conspiracy theories, but the actions and lies of the US regime since 9-11 stink

Come on, just admit you're an conspiracy theorist!
Why else would Osama know about 'shadowy CIA' stuff.

(Don't care about your reputation: as a commie, on an american site, you're considered as an idiot anyway).

^ am I missing something or are you just being plain obnoxious and rude? with regard to the cia and bin laden it is well known that during his time with the Mujahideen his 'office of services' received cia cash

Usama bin Laden was whacked. And justly so. I am sorry that our government, as usual, lied about the issue of self defense.

ruveyn

Their are many falsehoods in your account. First off..we in the U.S do NOT want to put Bin Laden on trial...it would have to be either a civilian trial or a military trial. A civilian trial would result in bin laden being allowed to spout his views, look at classified intell from our intelligence agencies, and create a circus atmosphere about what information is pertiant and how we got that info, i.e waterboarding, torture...we weren't going to allow bin laden to waste our tax payer money and create a political firestorm. Second, if it was a military trial, he would have to be tried at Guantanamo Bay...you think Obama who detests the military prison really wanted him tried there? You also run up the issue of kidnapping...would Pakistan lodge a complaint with the UN over soveriegnty issue? You also mistakenly believe that the CIA funded Bin Laden...this is a lie repeated ad nauseum..the reality is Osama inherited a fortune from his families construction monopoly in the Hejaz. He didn't need U.S money nor did he want it..He set up his own personal Arab mujaheeden fund called the Makhat al-khadimat. The CIA funded other Afghan mujaheeden but not the Arabs who came in. Their is a big difference. Perhaps if you did a bit of research into bin ladens background and the issues surrounding a trial vs military precision strike you'll not have very conspiracy laden thoughts.

^
"If he had surrendered - attempted to surrender - I think we should obviously have accepted that but there was no indication that he wanted to do that and therefore his killing was appropriate."
eric holder

"We were prepared to capture him if that was possible,"
Jay Carney

and from someone far wiser than myself

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/05/04/3207266.htm

We didn't have a choice if he put his hands in the air and surrendered...we would have had to take him into custody. You have already rushed to the conclusion that Osama surrendered correctly and that he didn't do anything to warrant being shot TWICE. Something happened that resulted in him being shot. Remember, the Obama administration was watching the raid unfold live via video from the SEALS....they saw what happened, and they knew Osama did not surrender without doing something to provoke being shot...

Further...3 successive U.S presidents have put out a directive authorizing the killing or capture of bin laden. According to International Law its lawful to kill an enemy combatant in the field. Steven Groves of the Heritage foundation has stated that under what we know now what transpired was legal according to the geneva conventions and conventional intl. law. Bin Laden did not raise his hands to surrender but was in fact moving at the time of the firefight. It was not an " execution" as that invovles bin laden already being in custody and the unwarranted killing of him for no reason at all. He was killed in the middle of the battle. But for you to rush to judgment and make it sound as if it was an execution is very foolish. You dont know if the Navy SEAL who shot Osama was in fear of his life at the time. And they certainly won't release classified material to the public on this.

If they shot him in front of a child, then that was wrong of them.
Other than that, I have no problem with Osama's death.
I don't care if he was fighting or not.
In fact, I hope he was smuggly surrendering and looking forward to a public trial.

Wow, Mr Dent is back.

Eyewitness reports are that he was moving toward a supply of firearms. Being soldiers, the SEAL team didn't wait for him to reach the weapons and shoot at them before they opened fire. As for the child, whose fault was it that bin Laden was hiding out in a family household, keeping his guns in the same room as the child? Were the SEALs supposed to just take the hits until they could usher the child into another room?

My Lord - people keep carrying on as if bin Laden were a white-collar criminal, posing no danger to anyone, surrounded by nothing more dangerous than a silk pillow. The man was a terrorist - with a supply of automatic weapons to hand. He had no compunctions about ordering other people to commit suicide from the comfort of his mansion; why suppose he would have had any compunctions about shooting American soldiers in his home?

they're saying that it's now appearing that only 1 of the people there were armed and that "40 minute firefight" never happened

they need to tell the truth on what really happened

Seven CIA agents were killed by a suicide vest last year. They had no idea what he was prepared to do, and there was an AK-47 in the room. He obviously had planned to fight. What kind of motions he made are unknown. Maybe you can go train the SEALs with your newfound mastery of tactics.

Secondly, we kill AQ guys all the time with no notice. It's not a game. We could have killed his entire family with an airstrike. This was certainly more humane.

I really don't give a damn how he died, as long as he died.

Yep...Obama had the option of a Stealth bomber strike on the compound which would have indiscriminatly killed countless people and we might never have known if Bin Laden was in the compound because the Pakistanis would have handled the cleanup, covering their tracks....this was more humane, more danger for our U.S involvement, and the correct method of getting proof of bin ladens status. The SEALS did a superb job.

Crashing a top secret stealth helicopter and executing a bunch of unarmed targets in front of their families doesn't really impress me. Probably why they made up the whole firefight and all the other embellishments.