SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

View Poll Results: What happened to Osama Bin Laden?

Voters
51. You may not vote on this poll
  • He's alive and well, planning another attack.

    31 60.78%
  • He's alive but planning on hiding for the rest of his life.

    8 15.69%
  • He's held captive somewhere under strict confidentiality.

    3 5.88%
  • He's dead.

    9 17.65%
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 76
  1. #26
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy TheOriginalH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Thailand
    Posts
    4,810
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: I'm not so sure about Osama's role

    Originally posted by ThomasAesir
    Ok, Osama is guilty
    I've yet to see anything even remotely resembling proof of that - has anyone actually seen anything that I've missed (apart from endless assumption that he did in various reports) ?
    ~The Artist Latterly Known as Crazy Hamster~
    922ee590a26bd62eb9b33cf2877a00df
    Currently delving into Django, GIT & CentOS

  2. #27
    daveh42
    SitePoint Community Guest

    Doesn't this "remotely resemble proof"?


  3. #28
    SitePoint Evangelist Umair.ms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Lahore, Pakistan
    Posts
    567
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    This still doesn't provide enough proofs. I've seen people using an even stronger language against America. In fact, once you go out of America, you can easily find people who have more hatred for America than Osama Bin Laden. These people do not take any physical action against America, but they openly declare there hatred. Does that mean you should declare them terrorists and kill them all? Only because they openly expressed there hatred for America?
    TinyPlanet.org
    Discuss and Debate World Events, Politics and Religion.
    Interact and Share your Views with People around the Globe.

  4. #29
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy TheOriginalH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Thailand
    Posts
    4,810
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quite the reverse in fact

    Bin Laden's own statements and those of his lieutenants since 4 October have also been increasingly self-incriminatory. He has made no attempt to deny responsibility for the attacks:
    Anyone with half a memory will remember his comments in the aftermath. I paraphrase, but he said something along the lines of the US deserving it but he had no involvement whatsoever. I don't swallow that in and of itself, but when outrightly denied or smokescreened on a government website, I have to question the legitimacy of anything further.

    Bush and Blair...don't understand any language but the language of force. Every time they kill us, we kill them, so the balance of terror is achieved".
    Fair comment imo, I do believe that the actions of both nations have caused "terror". I think the use of the word is unfortunate, but then I'd like to be able to speak the original language and not rely on a transcript the aim of which is clearly to convince me of his guilt - in turn to justify the slaying of over 4000 innocents. Personally, I don't think it can be - either in the case of S11th or the retaliation.


    To clarify, I do not believe Osama did NOT do it, I also do not believe that he did. The evidence produced thus far, the retracted video which was blatantly fake, and the almost juvenile arguments put forward by western governments lead me to believe more and more that he is simply a scapegoat. I feel insulted by the media spin which has attempted to make questioning the "gospel" according to government tantemount to terrorist sympathising.
    ~The Artist Latterly Known as Crazy Hamster~
    922ee590a26bd62eb9b33cf2877a00df
    Currently delving into Django, GIT & CentOS

  5. #30
    SitePoint Evangelist Umair.ms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Lahore, Pakistan
    Posts
    567
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    As I said earlier in this thread that each time you see Osama on the television, he appears to be a different man.

    I strongly belief is that Osama is just a puppet which is fully co-operating with USA to provide each and every reason to interfere in this region.

    I might be wrong. And may be after 2 or 3 decades we find the truth.
    TinyPlanet.org
    Discuss and Debate World Events, Politics and Religion.
    Interact and Share your Views with People around the Globe.

  6. #31
    daveh42
    SitePoint Community Guest

    Does the US have a right to defend itself?

    To clarify, I do not believe Osama did NOT do it, I also do not believe that he did.
    This is a nihilistic view and does not clarify anything.

    The evidence produced thus far, the retracted video which was blatantly fake, and the almost juvenile arguments put forward by western governments lead me to believe more and more that he is simply a scapegoat.
    Bin Laden did declare war against the US:
    "On that basis, and in compliance with Allah's order, we issue the following fatwa to all Muslims: The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies -- civilians and military -- is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque [Mecca] from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim."
    http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/docs/980223-fatwa.htm

    I feel insulted by the media spin which has attempted to make questioning the "gospel" according to government tantemount to terrorist sympathising.
    If you believe that the US media and the US government are somehow acting in concert, you are mistaken. There is constant questioning by the media of the government. At numerous press conferences every day reporters attempt to decipher the spin of the US government's press secretaries. But, unless you have a nihilistic view, certain facts are irrefutable. It is the questioning of these facts that divert attention from bringing those responsible to justice.

  7. #32
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy TheOriginalH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Thailand
    Posts
    4,810
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: Does the US have a right to defend itself?

    Originally posted by daveh42

    If you believe that the US media and the US government are somehow acting in concert, you are mistaken. There is constant questioning by the media of the government. At numerous press conferences every day reporters attempt to decipher the spin of the US government's press secretaries. But, unless you have a nihilistic view, certain facts are irrefutable. It is the questioning of these facts that divert attention from bringing those responsible to justice.
    I was referring to western governments, not just the US, after all, the link you posted was from Msr Blair's office.

    The "facts" are entirely refutable because there is simply no evidence other than the spoutings of their source that they are in fact, fact.

    Given years of proven and admitted misinformation, and abudantly obvious motives, I choose not to swallow what I'm fed without question.

    Bin Laden did declare war against the US:
    "On that basis, and in compliance with Allah's order, we issue the following fatwa to all Muslims: The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies -- civilians and military -- is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque [Mecca] from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim."
    http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/docs/980223-fatwa.htm
    What precisely does this prove? That Osama is not a fan of he states and encourages action against them (based, in his opinion, on incursion to religious territories). That I didn't dispute. It doesn't prove a thing about s11th, all it presents is the same type of motive that I maintain is extant for the US.

    Dismissing healthy scepticism as nihilistic simply illustrates dogmatism
    ~The Artist Latterly Known as Crazy Hamster~
    922ee590a26bd62eb9b33cf2877a00df
    Currently delving into Django, GIT & CentOS

  8. #33
    SitePoint Addict ThomasAesir's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    214
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    guilty of encitement

    I was thinking more in the line of that he was guilty of enciting the 911 bombers at "the base". The training video's and public statement are proof of that. I don't believe that he had any actual involvement in the planning.
    Thomas Oeser - Blueprint Software
    Web Scripting Editor v 5.2 One cool Web editing tool.
    3dcomputergraphics.com Coming Soon!

  9. #34
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy TheOriginalH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Thailand
    Posts
    4,810
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: guilty of encitement

    Originally posted by ThomasAesir
    I was thinking more in the line of that he was guilty of enciting the 911 bombers at "the base". The training video's and public statement are proof of that. I don't believe that he had any actual involvement in the planning.
    Now that charge I wouldn't dispute.
    ~The Artist Latterly Known as Crazy Hamster~
    922ee590a26bd62eb9b33cf2877a00df
    Currently delving into Django, GIT & CentOS

  10. #35
    daveh42
    SitePoint Community Guest

    Guilty

    Originally posted by TheOriginalH
    The "facts" are entirely refutable because there is simply no evidence other than the spoutings of their source that they are in fact, fact.
    Terrorists attacked the US on 9/11. That fact is irrefutable.

    Originally posted by TheOriginalH
    Given years of proven and admitted misinformation, and abudantly obvious motives, I choose not to swallow what I'm fed without question.
    This sounds a bit dogmatic to me. Western governments and western media do not have a monopoly on “proven and admitted misinformation”. And yet, you believe bin Laden when he stated, “he had no involvement whatsoever” just because you have lost faith in western governments. Even if western governments lied in the past, does not prove that bin Laden is telling the truth when he denies involvement.

    Originally posted by TheOriginalH
    Dismissing healthy scepticism as nihilistic simply illustrates dogmatism
    I hope you apply the same “healthy skepticism” to non-western sources.

    Originally posted by TheOriginalH
    I do not believe Osama did NOT do it, I also do not believe that he did.
    I may be mistaken in describing this as nihilistic, but your statement does violate the laws of logic. Either he did it, or he didn’t, regardless of what you believe or don’t believe.

    Originally posted by ThomasAesir
    I was thinking more in the line of that he was guilty of enciting the 911 bombers at "the base".
    Originally posted by TheOriginalH
    Now that charge I wouldn't dispute.
    So you both believe he is guilty of incitement? What evidence do you use to support this claim?

  11. #36
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy TheOriginalH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Thailand
    Posts
    4,810
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Terrorists attacked the US on 9/11. That fact is irrefutable.
    Of course it is refutable. But I do believe it, the balance of probabilities points in that direction based upon evidence before me...

    This sounds a bit dogmatic to me. Western governments and western media do not have a monopoly on “proven and admitted misinformation”. And yet, you believe bin Laden when he stated, “he had no involvement whatsoever” just because you have lost faith in western governments. Even if western governments lied in the past, does not prove that bin Laden is telling the truth when he denies involvement.
    hmmm, not sure it's dogmatism, but either way - no I don't believe what OBL said purely because he isn't part of the western media machine, or in fact necessarily (sp) at all. My point was that a denial WAS made, and a government website (the one under which I currently reside in fact), has blatantly stated otherwise - this smells a bit to me....

    I hope you apply the same “healthy skepticism” to non-western sources.
    Oh, absolutely, I lead an ever questioning life and try to take NOTHING at face value... some may consider that sad, I consider it open minded.

    I may be mistaken in describing this as nihilistic, but your statement does violate the laws of logic. Either he did it, or he didn’t, regardless of what you believe or don’t believe.
    Your argument (that he did or didn't do it) IS irrefutable. However, I wasn't claiming a third way, merely that I had been convinced of neither yet - much to the annoyance of my own government I'm sure..

    So you both believe he is guilty of incitement? What evidence do you use to support this claim?
    Again, based on balance of probabilities, the training videos, statements (such as the one you posted), history etc that have been used to prove he was responsible for s11th. While I believe they fail miserably at that objective, I do believe they present us with real evidence of encitement.
    ~The Artist Latterly Known as Crazy Hamster~
    922ee590a26bd62eb9b33cf2877a00df
    Currently delving into Django, GIT & CentOS

  12. #37
    daveh42
    SitePoint Community Guest

    Incitement = Responsibility

    Originally posted by TheOriginalH
    I do believe they present us with real evidence of encitement.
    Inciting someone to kill someone else makes the inciter just as guilty as the one that actually does the killing.

  13. #38
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy TheOriginalH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Thailand
    Posts
    4,810
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    That really is a matter of opinion.
    ~The Artist Latterly Known as Crazy Hamster~
    922ee590a26bd62eb9b33cf2877a00df
    Currently delving into Django, GIT & CentOS

  14. #39
    SitePoint Addict ThomasAesir's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    214
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    judgement of Bin Laden

    That really is a matter of opinion.
    The judges opinion according to the law. So the question remains what law?

    Is it legal for an American court sit in judgement of Bin Laden? I don't think so. I think that it would be possible for Bin Laden to receive a fair trial in America.

    This is why the Internation Criminal Court is being created. I know people cry foul at the loss of any sovereignty but get over it and move with the times.
    Thomas Oeser - Blueprint Software
    Web Scripting Editor v 5.2 One cool Web editing tool.
    3dcomputergraphics.com Coming Soon!

  15. #40
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy TheOriginalH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Thailand
    Posts
    4,810
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I would dispute that. There has to be a break in the chain somewhere. The statement was made a long time ago and while it was is entirely possible to infer that the actions were carried out as a result of it, that is not proven and even if it were, would you hold OBL responsible for every evil deed against the states? They have a lot of enemies you know, that is a dangerous road and open to abuse by any crackpot wanting to have a go...
    ~The Artist Latterly Known as Crazy Hamster~
    922ee590a26bd62eb9b33cf2877a00df
    Currently delving into Django, GIT & CentOS

  16. #41
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy TheOriginalH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Thailand
    Posts
    4,810
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    btw - I agree wholeheartedly that he should be brought before an international criminal court and a solid case made against him. Cries (heard in relation to Taliban and Al Qaeda prisoners in Cuba) of "they don't deserve that treatment" actually mean that the war against the west has been won imo.
    ~The Artist Latterly Known as Crazy Hamster~
    922ee590a26bd62eb9b33cf2877a00df
    Currently delving into Django, GIT & CentOS

  17. #42
    SitePoint Addict ThomasAesir's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    214
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    quoting myself

    quoting myself. . .
    I think that it would be possible for Bin Laden to receive a fair trial in America.
    I meant to type impossible there.
    Thomas Oeser - Blueprint Software
    Web Scripting Editor v 5.2 One cool Web editing tool.
    3dcomputergraphics.com Coming Soon!

  18. #43
    daveh42
    SitePoint Community Guest

    Resolution 260

    "Art. 3. The following acts shall be punishable:"
    "(c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;"

    This makes it pretty clear that under international agreement bin Laden's incitement to commit genocide of Americans is a crime. It goes on...

    "Art. 6. Persons charged with genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in Article 3 shall be tried by a competent tribunal of the State in the territory of which the act was committed..."

    This is NOT a matter of opinion, but a matter of international agreement.

    http://www.tufts.edu/departments/fle...exts/BH225.txt

  19. #44
    Digital Warrior Renegade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    480
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by TheOriginalH
    Of course it is refutable. But I do believe it, the balance of probabilities points in that direction based upon evidence before me...
    Some things are just not refutable.

    How about the law of gravity. Shall we debate that it does or does not exist?

    OBL or not, we know who directly carried out the attacks. Sure, you could say we haven't been given any real proof. And your right. But explaining HOW they found out would reveal classified information not publically available. They could tell us but then they'd have to kill us

    If Bush, single-handedly, said he had proof, and refused to share it with anyone, than I would be skeptical. However, he showed his proof to many other world leaders, and they agreed with Bush. If it's good enough for the major world leaders, it's good enough for me.
    --There's my 1.5 cents, now where is my change!?!?

  20. #45
    SitePoint Addict ThomasAesir's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    214
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    genocide????

    Art. 6. Persons charged with genocide
    911 wasn't genocide. Genocide is the systematic killing of a racial or cultural group.

    Bin Laden and Co. fight for religious reasons or at least that's what they claim. The sole purpose is to get American (Christian) troops out of Saudi Arabia and as far from Mecca as possible. Mecca being the birthplace of Mohammed and the holiest city of Islam.

    Genocide is what happened in Cambodia with Pol Pot and his Khmer Rouge regime and who secretly funded that regime?
    Last edited by ThomasAesir; Jun 19, 2002 at 10:39.
    Thomas Oeser - Blueprint Software
    Web Scripting Editor v 5.2 One cool Web editing tool.
    3dcomputergraphics.com Coming Soon!

  21. #46
    SitePoint Addict ThomasAesir's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    214
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Wink You can trust Bush

    However, he showed his proof to many other world leaders, and they agreed with Bush.
    Yes, because the Bush regime is so trustworthy, as you saw in the totally above board election that the he won, fair and square. With a little help from his friends, brother and the courts.
    Thomas Oeser - Blueprint Software
    Web Scripting Editor v 5.2 One cool Web editing tool.
    3dcomputergraphics.com Coming Soon!

  22. #47
    daveh42
    SitePoint Community Guest

    Yes it was genocide

    Originally posted by ThomasAesir

    911 wasn't genocide. Genocide is the systematic killing of a racial or cultural group.
    "Art. 2. In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
    (a) Killing members of the group;
    (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
    (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;"

    Emphasis added.

    Bin Laden incited people to kill Americans and is therefore guilty of genocide.

  23. #48
    Digital Warrior Renegade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    480
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: You can trust Bush

    Originally posted by ThomasAesir
    Yes, because the Bush regime is so trustworthy, as you saw in the totally above board election that the he won, fair and square. With a little help from his friends, brother and the courts.
    oh god, here we go. Let me educate you my dear Australian friend

    1) Bush actually did win fair and square. Electoral votes, not popular vote, elect the president of the US. This is per the constitution. Bush had more electoral votes, period

    2) Florida law clearly states, that a hand count may ONLY occur if the ballot counting machines have been destroyed or are all inoperable. By letting the hand count proceed, the Florida Supreme Court broke the law. The federal court overturned their decision. And rightly so.

    ***************************************************

    No one paid those other countries to agree with Bush. There is no human-manufactured incentive to go one way or the other. If others agree with Bush, it's probably because he is right, and because the eveidence is conclusive.

    We will probably never know the real evidence against OBL. At least not in any of our lifetimes. And i'm comfortable with that so long as we have allies in this war (which we do)
    Last edited by Renegade; Jun 19, 2002 at 15:57.
    --There's my 1.5 cents, now where is my change!?!?

  24. #49
    SitePoint Addict ThomasAesir's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    214
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    No one paid those other countries to agree with Bush. There is no human-manufactured incentive to go one way or the other. If others agree with Bush, it's probably because he is right, and because the eveidence is conclusive

    It's all just semantics anyway. The evidence is either conclusive or very probable.


    Emphasis added.

    Bin Laden incited people to kill Americans and is therefore guilty of genocide.
    I would define it as a crime against humanity.

    To some extent, crimes against humanity overlap with genocide and war crimes. But crimes against humanity are distinguishable from genocide in that they do not require an intent to "destroy in whole or in part," as cited in the 1948 Genocide Convention, but only target a given group and carry out a policy of "widespread or systematic" violations. Crimes against humanity are also distinguishable from war crimes in that they not only apply in the context of war-they apply in times of war and peace.
    From: http://www.crimesofwar.org/thebook/c...-humanity.html
    Thomas Oeser - Blueprint Software
    Web Scripting Editor v 5.2 One cool Web editing tool.
    3dcomputergraphics.com Coming Soon!

  25. #50
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy TheOriginalH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Thailand
    Posts
    4,810
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Pleeeeeeaaasse, not the election chestnut again!!!!!

    Renegade, to most of the rest of the world it seems incredible that anyone with a lower agrigate number of votes should win the election in the circumstances, Thomas, by the system in place, he did win it fair and square (if you ignore the "corporate" deals.... ).

    If it's good enough for the major world leaders, it's good enough for me.
    But not me....if everything was operated in this manner then corruption would be more rife than it is today and the system would be open to utter abuse. It is our government, we choose as a whole how the nations are run. It could also not be "good enough" for any court of law btw.
    ~The Artist Latterly Known as Crazy Hamster~
    922ee590a26bd62eb9b33cf2877a00df
    Currently delving into Django, GIT & CentOS


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •