world

Amnesty criticizes U.S. for 'unlawful' bin Laden raid, drone attacks

95 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2012 AFP

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

95 Comments
Login to comment

I've agreed with Amnesty more times than not over the years, but it's a case of not in this instance. How and when would Osama and his ilk ever be bought to justice?

6 ( +13 / -7 )

In other news, the world keeps turning.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

How and when would Osama and his ilk ever be bought to justice?

How about starting by not shooting him in the head? Then pack him onto the helicopter. But that is just the raid.

Another way would have been to send in small raiding squads to Afghanistan aimed at capturing these guys, rather than send in battalions and take on the Taliban too. No sense opening a two front war if you don't have to, whether its literal or figurative.

Then of course it would help if GWB took al-Qaida as seriously as WJC did, and actually read reports instead of going on vacation.

The United States is looking more and more like a rogue nation every year.

-7 ( +9 / -16 )

Amnesty criticizes U.S. for 'unlawful' bin Laden raid, drone attacks

Who cares Bin Laden is gone that is all that matters, how he was killed does not matter to the right thinking pople in the world, only the bleeding heart left wing marshmellow spined terroist Sympathizers would want to make an issue out of it

5 ( +12 / -9 )

I have a lot of respect for Amnesty but on this I can not agree with them.

6 ( +12 / -7 )

I'm trying to recall Amnesty International's condemnation of the 911 attacks. Oh wait...

5 ( +10 / -7 )

I'm trying to recall Amnesty International's condemnation of the 911 attacks. Oh wait...

What are they supposed to do, complain to the terrorists who have no respect for the law?

7 ( +9 / -2 )

On President Obama's orders, the US military invaded Pakistan.

Pakistan is not US territory.

They raided a house and assassinated someone.

We are told that this was Bin Laden, but the body was dumped at sea and so we will never know for sure.

There was no trial.

This is NOT the act of a democratic country.

This is not the act of a country that calls itself the land of the free.

Unless this means "free to do whatever they want."

-7 ( +8 / -16 )

Are you kidding? Unlawful?

0 ( +5 / -6 )

Did they criticize bin Laden for having his henchmen fly those planes into the two towers? He started it and we finished him. Simple as that.

0 ( +8 / -8 )

Amnesty International is a great organization but crying over spilt milk over OBL?? The entire free world should be outraged with AQ and the Taliban and thank Mr.Obama for having not only the courage but also the brains to kill off scum radical terrorists anywhere and everywhere at any time!! Let them drones do our talking!! Kaboom baby!!

3 ( +10 / -7 )

He started it and we finished him.

What is this? Gunlaw? Cowboys?

"Shoot first and ask questions after?"

-8 ( +8 / -17 )

Soooo Amnesty Int'l would have given OBL... amnesty? please..

3 ( +8 / -5 )

Yeah, I think AI is missing the mark on this one and just wasting resources in the end. The part where they criticize Canada for not arresting Bush is where they drop their credibility to a new low, and I'd prefer it if an organization like that took their credibility more seriously since they are able to create positive change in the world.

On that note....

The world is struggling to keep up with technology, which is what this all comes down to. Laws were written at a time when war was war and police actions were police actions. Nowadays the line is blurred with things like international jihad not done under the flag of one country. Even if one were able to piece together a mix of laws that might make the raid appear to be illegal, my only response would be that it's time to change those laws. Technology has made a situation where a very small group of people can inflict a lot of damage. And technology has also made a situation where those specific people can be killed. Technology has made a situation where those people can hide and it has made a situation where they can operate in a way that they know the laws are not able to handle since they were written in a different era.

The next challenge is to create an updated set of laws that deal with the reality we face today. Everyone knows there was no way to get to people like Bin Laden and arrest him, and if the laws make everything else impossible then the laws are in fact creating a government who is forced to work against the protection of the people they are trusted to protect.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

I wonder if they'll call for President Obama to be arrested while in foreign countries as well. It's not like amnesty international has double standards or anything.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Didnt the Amnesty national was sponsered by US congress?

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Materials confiscated during the raid demonstrated that UBL was planning future mischief, so there's a good chance lives were saved. Sorry, Amnesty, but that alone justifies putting him down.

-1 ( +6 / -7 )

The global rights monitor also criticized Canada for failing to arrest Bush when he visited in October, “despite clear evidence that he was responsible for crimes under international law, including torture.”

heh, that would have been great if Canada arrested Bush. lol

I feel taking out Osama was completely justified and necessary, and as a citizen of a democratic country, that would have been my vote.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

Well, AI is of course technically correct. Except the world is not such a wonderful place as they would like to believe, and they are certainly barking up the wrong tree. But what do you expect from a thoroughly leftist indoctrinated organization.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Now Mr Bush Jr is enjoying his retirement in his Texas ranch when millions got jobless across the 52 states, sure the Canucks were no 'good neighbours' of the american people! With a bad neighbour like this you wont need an enemy!

-1 ( +5 / -5 )

Murder, pure and simple.

Are police officers allowed to shoot unarmed suspects in the head?

I hope not!

Every man, woman and child deserves a fair trial. No exceptions.

The only thing any of us know about Bin Laden is what the media told us. Has any poster on this board actually met him before they judged him as worthy of death.

1 ( +10 / -9 )

Osama Bin Laden is/was a MURDERER , he did it in the name of religion, his god etc..the USA popped his ass wide open, threw his old ass out to sea, let him become useful as shark bait, and we have these retards from Amnesty International crying over the US tactics to kill off scum terrorists?? Sorry Amnesty International, time to stop smoking your underwear and banana peels and get back down to reality, we let these terrorists get just enough breathing room, and they will slice our throats wide open, again in the name of their so called religion and their so called god, so what to do?? Kill them off one by one, and forget about human rights for a while,say until these cowardly bastards learn to respect OUR HUMAN RIGHTS!!!

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

Sunned, shocked and this is outrageous! I often agree with many issues of Amnesty International , but not on this particular one.

Sorry Amnesty International, you are barking at a wrong tree. You failed to project pains and sufferings of the other end (victims and their families). In my opinion, it was well justified.

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

NeverSubmit - Such beautiful sentiment. Brought a tear to my eye. However, you'll find once you are finished your ethics 101 course and live a little in the real world, perhaps a tinge naive.

-1 ( +6 / -7 )

This kind of ridiculousness is why Amnesty International is no longer relevant or respected. This has been going on for awhile. Alexander Solzhenitsyn wrote about how Amnesty International asked him to compare the Guantanamo Bay detention camps to the Soviet Gulags. He told them that there was no comparison and fully realized then how willing they were to distort the truth for political expedience and fundraising.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

NeverSubmit

Every man, woman and child deserves a fair trial. No exceptions.

You are very correct but if however during the course of arrest the suspect resists and is uncooperative and is then killed during the ensuing struggle that is labeled as tuff titty.

If you don't resist and struggle and don't have your body guards fire at the arresting officers then there is a good chance you will make it your "fair trial", others cannot be held responsible for your death due to your unreasonable behaviour.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Just release the prisoner who supposedly helped locate Landen. If it doesn't happen, no more $$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Yeah right, gloryhound. default on to your next one please.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

If it was any other country the condemnation would be overwhelming.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

You are very correct but if however during the course of arrest the suspect resists and is uncooperative and is then killed during the ensuing struggle that is labeled as tuff titty.

Well, you had me for a sec, but then I realized I would shoot or otherwise attack anyone that invaded my house with helicopters and guns at the ready. And of course, my bodyguards, if I had any, would be expected to do the same.

I do not mourn bin Laden. I lament that my government throws all rules and protocol to the four winds when it suits them, then casually turns around and condemns those who do the same. This sort of behavior led to two needless wars, needless deaths, billions of dollars wasted, etc. etc.

But I am not surprised that so many are failing to pick an ideological side, and instead picking a more physical side. Its a low form of human behavior, but very common. "My country right or wrong" is the oath of a primitive mind. A higher functioning brain is capable of condemning both bin Laden and America for their transgressions. Too few of us in this world unfortunately.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Its interesting that the US and their supporters have no qualms about violating sovereign nations borders to launch attacks on people and all because someone violated their borders and attacked them. So in reality are they any better than those they chase?

And before l get screamed done for how many Americans died in the attacks, yes that is true but home many innocent civilians have been killed by wrong information, for being in the wrong place at the wrong time and as collateral damage. Are there lives worth less than that of an American?

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Talk about denting your credibility. It's no different as to when bleeding hearts whine about the rights of child sex murderers.

People like bin Laden chose a path with forgone conclusion. AI need to find anoher axe to grind, the US decision to take out this nut is saluted by just about everyone other than potty liberals or Romney supporters...

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

no surer sign that our special forces, best in the world, continue to outrage the tender sensibilities of 'liberals' and their mohammedan allies in America and abroad.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

It will be interesting to see what happens when one of these days the US launches a raid like the OBL raid to capture (read kill) some AQ leader in a sovereign nation and that nation shoots down the aircraft carrying the US troops. All because the US believes it has the right to do as it pleases where it pleases. Imagine all the gung ho yeah lets kill em types then. They will be so outraged and demanding retribution. Sadly it is only a matter of time, actually it nearly happened during the OBL raid.

By all means take care of your OBL's of the world but just remember your tactics will come back and bite your butt one day.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

I've agreed with Amnesty more times than not over the years, but it's a case of not in this instance. How and when would Osama and his ilk ever be bought to justice?

I would agree with you, however isn't that just looking at it through one way glass. Who will be held responsible for the violations of human rights during president bushes time in office? No one will ever arrest him. So what then?

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Let's all wring our hands.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

ps. There are many americans i feel commenting on this story that are doing their country a dis service by what they are saying and how they are saying it. Americans are very much stereotyped to be loud and overly patriotic with a very "we're better than them" attitude. Im not saying what you are posting is wrong, but there is a reason why most of the world dislike you and you should think about how you approach these topics. You're coming off as cowboys more and more. Which is precisely why AI are always on your back. Just saying.

3 ( +7 / -4 )

jessebaybay,

You are spot on in what you say. Sadly though they do not see that.... And yes that is why when you ask people that are not American they normally have a negative opinion of the Americans.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

@gogogo: Are you kidding? Unlawful?

Yes it was unlawful. He (and others) were hunted down and murdered out of revenge. He did not have a trial and was not convicted or sentenced. How do we know he was even responsible for the 911 and other terror attacks? Because the 'ahem' trust worthy news told us so.

If they knew where he was, they could have tried to arrest him to face trial.

Of course i am glad he is gone, but civilized nations have procedures for handing and sentencing criminals/terrorists. When these laws and procedures are ignored, we too become reckless criminals. (i.e. 2 wrongs do not make a right)

0 ( +4 / -4 )

normally have a negative opinion of the Americans.

Same with Jews and blacks. Here in Japan they hate Koreans. The Koreans hate the Japanese. Aussies hate Kiwis and it goes the other way as well. In Europe they all hate the Germans. All deserved, obviously, and it's not racist if there is a good reason to have a negative opinion of a few hundred million people.

Thank god a site like JT exists where I can express myself the way I really want to. Sometimes I don't think black people know how much they are hated and it's good to be able to say that.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

How about Amnesty do more condemning terrorist groups without fearing one of 'em sending a suicide bomber at their homes, hahaha.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Maybe Amnesty could go one better and not just condemn the terrorists but stop them.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

When states don't obey their own laws any more, why should anybody else?

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

@Cletus, I'm not American and I don't have a negative opinion about Americans. About the only people I have a negative opinion about are people who fly planes into buildings and blow up buses, and trains and purposely try to kill innocent men, women and children and lovely stuff like that. In fact I have such a negative opinion of them that I think the guys who get rid of them shouldn't be condemned by Amnesty.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

It's no different as to when bleeding hearts whine about the rights of child sex murderers.

You mean like Toshikazu Sugaya? Ooops! Yeah, that is why we want fair trials, the rule of law, justice, sense, etc. etc. For 17 years, he was the child sex murderer you would say only a bleeding heart would say has rights. Then he was exonerated.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

There are rules and laws for International Criminals...but then there's no laws governing monsters. Those have the audacity to defend such a monster doesn't know what it feels like to lose loved ones in such a horrific way and for NO GOOD REASON.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

yasukuni

@Cletus, I'm not American and I don't have a negative opinion about Americans. About the only people I have a negative opinion about are people who fly planes into buildings and blow up buses, and trains and purposely try to kill innocent men, women and children and lovely stuff like that. In fact I have such a negative opinion of them that I think the guys who get rid of them shouldn't be condemned by Amnesty.

I think we all have a negative opinion about people that do that Yasukuni. How is your opinion when the US kills innocents all in the name of killing a wanted terrorist though? I find it interesting that people tolerate innocents getting killed if it means a terrorist dies and it doesnt hurt either if the innocents are foreigners. Imagine the outrage though if the LAPD for example blew up a bus load of people just to kills a wanted murderer. Would people stand for that? Of course not.... Why? because its just not done. But some dont blink an eye when the US kills 20 innocents in an attempt to murder 1 AQ person. That is all lm saying

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Just a bit of statistics: since 911 the US has killed more than 30000 people in drone attacks. When you assume a mere 10% of collateral damage - which is probably much too low - the number of innocent people killed in the war against terror is the same order than the people killed by AQ.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

The United States IS a rogue state when it comes to respecting sovereignty and getting involved in the affairs of state right around the world and it has been for many years. It has a long history of hegemonic practice in all parts of the world, and anyone with even a perfunctory understanding of history should know that. Commodore Mathew Perry gave Japan it's first exhibition of it back in 1853, which is but one of many, many examples. I think Amnesty is right to criticize the US for these practices and is an important voice in a Global perspective. The Bin laden case is quite an interesting one because he was obviously involved in one of the most spectacular and dastardly attacks in human history, however, there is also a fair argument that without the US political and military meddling and manipulation in the Middle East and surrounds for the many decades prior, such extreme terrorism may not exist in the first place.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

I'm trying to recall Amnesty International's condemnation of the 911 attacks. Oh wait...

USNinJapan, when have they ever condemned a non-government terrorist attack? Why single out 911? Are American lives worth more than others?

Maybe next you will criticize the ACLU for failing to condemn the Tianamen Square Massacre? Get a clue:

There are six key areas which Amnesty deals with:

* Women's, children's, minorities' and indigenous rights * Ending torture * Abolition of the death penalty * Rights of refugees * Rights of prisoners of conscience * Protection of human dignity.
2 ( +4 / -2 )

If it's about the US hunting down Bin Laden and killing him, the US wanted him dead, and when they found him they went for him. They had the resources, and he was a wanted terrorist responsible for many heinous acts of terror. It's all about having the adequate resources to be able to pull it off, and not many nations have that.

Regarding respecting other nation's sovereignty, well, it's a simple matter of who you are up against. The US cannot do to China and Russia what they did in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Vietnam, Somalia etc, simply because they will be ripped off. So they pick on small states incapable of standing up to them in terms of weapons or economic capabilities.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Drones are actually pretty scary stuff... Nobody has to take responsibility for the killings done by the drones remotely controlled from continents away.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

It's simply the "right of power". But what happens to you when you loose that power? Take a look at Spain and Portugal and sooner rather than later, France and the UK. Every dog has its day. The bases of powewr are changing.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

showmethemoney

Get a clue? That's rich. Which one of these six tenets applies to OBL? None. He was an armed enemy combatant who died resisting capture. Amnesty International has no business saying word one about how the US Government took care of OBL.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

showmethemoney

Maybe next you will criticize the ACLU for failing to condemn the Tianamen Square Massacre?

I wouldn't because they did condemn it and continue to do so.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

USNinJapan2

He was an armed enemy combatant who died resisting capture. Amnesty International has no business saying word one about how the US Government took care of OBL.

Yes he was, and the US blatantly breached another nations sovereignty by launching a military operation within their borders. Not to mention they killed an unarmed guy that they could have taken prisoner. But really we shouldnt expect a member of the US military to take any other opinion now should we?

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

Who knows whether Bin Laden was involved in 9/11 or not?

He was tried and found guilty with no trial whatsoever.

This is a MAJOR travesty of justice.

He may have been the most evil guy since Adolf.

Or he might not have been.

We never had the chance to find out.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

The United States of America was founded on the principle of the Rule of LAW, as opposed to the Rule of Men. However, at least since Lincoln that founding principle has been all but abandoned, to the shame of the people who tolerate it. Many of the comments here reflect the statist "Might makes Right " meme. Make no mistake, terrorism is to be abhorred, more so its practitioners. However, the Rule of LAW must reign. Anyone who considers themselves a Patriot, or a law-abiding person would be recommended to read the following : With Freedom and Justice for Some, Part 1, by Glenn Greenwald, Posted May 23 2012

Amnesty International supports the rule of law.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Who knows whether Bin Laden was involved in 9/11 or not?

Oh, please stop with the Moore, Stone conspiracy theories.

Anyone that really follows jihadist terrorists and the violence and terror that they caused time and time again, know for a fact that OBL was responsible, which he admitted taking credit for and as USNinJapan said, "he was an armed enemy combatant" a terrorist who resisted capture, pure and simple! And after everything he did, he got what he deserved and good riddance. Would it have been good to have taken him in to get some serious answers, probably, but for some people here to question the military actions of the soldiers can't really comment on anything, if you have never been in a war or part of special forces or ever participated in raids or been fired at or been in a hostile situation, then you should refrain on passing judgment. It's easy to throw stones at glass houses. We weren't there and we don't know or can say anything, we don't know what kind of fire power or resistance they encountered. Obama stated it was a Capture/Kill mission, personally, I believe it was a kill mission from the beginning IMO as I stated before, bringing OBL in alive would have been helpful, but probably given the circumstances it didn't turn out that way. Funny, I don't hear Amnesty criticizing how Pakistan harbored and knowingly (they said, they had no idea OBL was hiding there...ahem...) kept him out of sight, so where is the condemnation about that? We are dealing with the typical criminal that if you surround them and tell them to give themselves up that they will do it willingly and peacefully if anyone thinks that, they are really in the deep end of the Kool aid.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

I wouldn't because they did condemn it and continue to do so.

Link us up.

Which one of these six tenets applies to OBL? None.

Extra-judicial execution counts as the death penalty.

He was an armed enemy combatant

The definition you are using was made up on the fly as an excuse to break the rules. You should get some integrity as well as a clue.

who died resisting capture.

In his own house surrounded by wives and children, but not surrounded by those trying to capture him. And those trying to capture him were not empowered by any rule of law to capture him, therefore, there is no reason for even bin Laden to think they were there for any purpose but to kill him. This is just more excuse making. Its a complete trap. Its like pouring oil on the road and expressing surprise that there was an accident. Bin Laden did not read minds anymore than I do, or YOU for that matter. Anyone would assume they were there to kill him ESPECIALLY since you yourself are calling him an enemy combatant inappropriately. I know well from this exchange that you think rules are just things to be bent to your desires.

Amnesty International has no business saying word one about how the US Government took care of OBL.

As a human rights org, they have more business than you.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

AI crying over the terrorist scum being taken out. Smh china is oppressing its minorities go bother them

0 ( +3 / -3 )

This is NOT the act of a democratic country. This is not the act of a country that calls itself the land of the free. Unless this means "free to do whatever they want."

seems like whatever the u.s. does, it's justified. definitely not the case, if another country like russia/china were to do a raid like this into a sovereign nation.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

OBL was hiding in pakistan for a while im sure the pakastani government was asked to help capture him b4 this raid and to fight the pakastani militant groups supporting him. We gave pakistan lots of money. Whether they were pussyfooting around or just couldnt get the job done idk but lose patience and have to take it into your own hands the longer he lived the more time he could have to plot something again. All these rules allow dangerous scumbags hideout and make them feel untouchable. Pakistan was violated but if OBL even was taken out then justice served for 9/11 his compound was just down the road from a prestigous pakistan military base or something they could have just captured him and gave him to the US and maybe they would not have been a raid

2 ( +4 / -2 )

This is NOT the act of a democratic country. This is not the act of a country that calls itself the land of the free. Unless this means "free to do whatever they want.

seems like the u.s. can do no wrong. won't be tolerated, if another country like russia/china were to do the same - raid another sovereign nation.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

OBL ON TAPE admitted responsibility for the destruction of the World Trade Center. Those of you disputing that are simply trying to re-write history to fit your rose-colored view of the world. In attacking civilians on U.S. soil, OBL and his Al Qaeda group declared war on the U.S., then proceded to run and hide under the protection of the Pakistani government. You'll pardon me if I don't get too teary-eyed that the U.S. bypassed that protection and carried out the execution for the crime OBL had already confessed to. You'll also have to pardon me if I don't get too teary-eyed that the U.S. conducts drone strikes on Al Qaeda forces still in Pakistan. If the Pakistani government would have done something about OBL and his cronies when they were first ASKED to, the U.S. wouldn't have been forced to act within the Pakistani borders.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

In attacking civilians on U.S. soil, OBL and his Al Qaeda group declared war on the U.S.

Right on, Fadamor. I agree with everything you have stated above. They are trying to rewrite the history, and it ain't gonna happen.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Perhaps the US congress owing paychecks to Amnesty International, you know the US congress funding the AI as the 'ministry of propaganda' for US government'!

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

In attacking civilians on U.S. soil, OBL and his Al Qaeda group declared war on the U.S., then proceded to run and hide under the protection of the Pakistani government.

That's the key sentence, declared war on the U.S. (which is a sovereign if I am not mistaken and OBL was sheltered and protected by the Pakistani government) that aggression alone gave the U.S. the right to take action on a country sovereign or not, and the U.S. will do so in the future. Let's not forget the millions of $$ that is being given to the Pakistani government to fight the Taliban and Al Qaeda, which they haven't been doing a good job to say the least. Obama already warned them, if they aren't willing to keep the Taliban under control, they will. Liberals want to cry foul when it doesn't fit their narrative. Not trying to get too far off topic, but if the attack was conducted by Bush, you guys would go on a serious witch hunt calling for his head. But now that Obama was the one in charge, I hear criticism of the U.S. military, but no criticism for the current President, since he is the one that gave the green light and rightfully so.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

The abandonment of the rule of law is but one sign of the decline into tyranny. "Drone Wars" - coming soon to a "theater" near you. Oops, our bad, mistaken identity.... quite regrettable.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

I don't understand why people seem to think it was totally simple to capture him alive and bring him to court in the U.S. Had America told the Pakis about it, the whole plan would have been botched and he would escape to somewhere else in Pakistan or another country. It HAD to be that way for any sort of justice to occur. We don't live in a perfect world where Osama would simply feel guilt for what he had done and wish to face trial. Amnesty International expects the impossible. They should just mind their own business.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Had America told the Pakis about it, the whole plan would have been botched and he would escape to somewhere else in Pakistan or another country.

Yeah but if you ignore that then you can make some pretty interesting points.

Like I said, there will have to be some new laws put on the books to handle the new way war is being fought. I think we can all agree on that. There needs to be some kind of oversight on the government and there needs to be some way to reach terrorists who operate on their own.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

People sure don't like to talk about the Chenegai airstrike, probably the most heinous of the drone attacks being criticized by Amnesty International. I wonder how many of you even know about it? Or decided to forget it?

In 2006 the CIA decided to target what they believed was al- Q's second in command. So they invaded Pakistan's airspace, and targeted a religious seminary, an act which is in itself a war crime, and doubly so if the building was undefended.

The target was not even there! But lots of children were. No less than 82 people died in a cowardly guided robot attack targetting one man. One man! 69 of the dead were children aged 7 to 17.

What American head rolled for this? An ABC journalist who told the truth.

The first thing the U.S. military did was deny involvement and instead blame the Pakistanis. Even the Pakistanis tried to claim it was them to quell unrest. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Pakistan_madrassa_air_strike

The OBL raid is the tip of the iceberg of dirty American action in the region.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

It was an extrajudicial killing. That's an internationally recognized crime. Was he guilty? Probably. The US used to represent good things, as written in the Constitution and Bill of Rights, but has strayed very far from the precepts that made it great. Herve, you are very correct about the Rule of Law. Since AUMF and PATRIOT Act were passed, the US has rapidly descended the slippery-slope into tyranny. It's really the biggest tragedy of all.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

showmethemoney

Great post and good point. Sadly though on here all you will get back is thumbs down and accusations that you support terrorism. It seems that many support these attacks regardless of the cost because a muslim life in their view is of less value than a US life. It would be interesting to compare how many did as a result of 9/11, USS Cole, the embassy bombings etc and how many innocent people have since lost their lives in the pursuit of revenge (not justice).

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Cletus, you're right. But the thumb-downers here are only hungry for blood-vengence and have no concept of justice or the rule of law.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

It was an extrajudicial killing.

You probably might, just might be right, if so, good!

That's an internationally recognized crime.

Yes, as soon as he (OBL) ordered Al Qaeda to target American interests.(Kenyan Embassy, USS Cole, NY Twin Towers) it became an internationally recognized crime which the U.S. had every right to retaliate by any means to neutralize any future and possible threats from the Jihadists)

The US used to represent good things, as written in the Constitution and Bill of Rights, but has strayed very far from the precepts that made it great.

That is your own personal subjective point of view.

Since AUMF and PATRIOT Act were passed, the US has rapidly descended the slippery-slope into tyranny

That is your own personal subjective point of view.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

I know the US taking out Bin Laden made some people angry. What they don't get is that that is the icing on the cake.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Bass4Funk, the issue is the Rule of LAW, which apparently is incomprehensible for so many posters here. That is not subjective.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

@Herve

I am aware of that, if you are implying that many people here find that killing OBL (based on the rule of law that he, Al Qaeda and the Taliban have violated time and time again and as such were subjected to the rule of laws under the U.S. and that some people here can't and want to believe that killing him) was incomprehensible, then you are right, it is NOT subjective, it was a long overdue necessity.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

I prefer to live in the Rule of Reality. I tend to get more done that way.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

@bass

The only rule your way of thinking follows is "Eye for an eye" , but what is missing is that there is legal process. There is no question that the acts of terrorism were beyond terrible and inhumanely atricious. We agree on that, I believe. However, crimes MUST be adjudicated through due process. Whether the crime is mass-murder, rape, theft, or other, justice must be meeted out by judicial process. If judicial process is circumvented, then society descends into the abyss of tyranny.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Mr Laden has been promoted to be a 'matyr' after the Seals killed him! So wether the action was lawful or unlawful doesnt matter anymore! The islamic world has no interest to argue or attention anyway!

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Hervbe Nmn L'Eisa: The only rule your way of thinking follows is "Eye for an eye" , but what is missing is that there is legal process. There is no question that the acts of terrorism were beyond terrible and inhumanely atricious. We agree on that, I believe. However, crimes MUST be adjudicated through due process. Whether the crime is mass-murder, rape, theft, or other, justice must be meeted out by judicial process. If judicial process is circumvented, then society descends into the abyss of tyranny.

OK. So what do you recommend for due process for people who will not be taken alive in countries where part of the government is sympathetic to his cause while the other part says they are trying to catch him and getting paid to do so? And exactly how would you like the law to read when you're dealing with a country who publicly says one thing on record and privately does another? Which would apply in your process? And how would you like the law to apply for people who have confessed and people who have not? Would self defense apply if he killed everyone who was coming to arrest him in whatever your form of arrest would be?

Go ahead and let us know what your plan is. As far as I can tell your plan amounts to "let Bin Laden stay alive in Pakistan." And when I say "a plan" I don't mean "here's a list of things not to do." That's not a plan, that's just criticism of another person's plan.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

People like bin Laden chose a path with forgone conclusion. AI need to find anoher axe to grind, the US decision to take out this nut is saluted by just about everyone other than potty liberals or Romney supporters...

lol, Romney supporters are on record as saying, that in more then 3 years as President, killing Bin Laden is about the only intelligent thing Obama has managed to accomplish. Its only lefty loons, who otherwise support the President, and of course those who hate America.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Superlib, your questions actually direct toward the heart of the matter.

This is where actual diplomacy comes into play. In the case of some horrific crime, such as murder, charges are laid within the jurisdiction wherein the alleged crime was committed including clear evidence against the accused. Arrest warrants are issued, and if the accused is outside that jurisdiction, then extradition requests are made to the jurisdiction where the accused may be. If that jurisdiction is another nation, then the request flows through diplomatic channels. When extradition treaties are non-existant, then direct diplomatic negotiations may ensue. In an extremely hostile diplomatic scenario, then the jurisdiction seeking the accused may consider more actions, possibly even a formal declaration of war, but as an absolute last resort. Most importantly, every diplomatic possibility must be exhausted before hostilities commence.

The main problem for the US in nations such as Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, Yemen, Somalia, etc. is that the US is viewed as an agressor/invader whose presence is most unwelcome due to actual or percieved previous hostile actions which obstructs any true diplomatic attempts. If there were friendly diplomatic relations in place, then there would also be increased cooperation precluding hostile actions.

All the clandestine activities that occur in fact thwart the possibility of good foreign relations and are the fuserope of future retaliations.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Why didnt America seeking a death warrant from the Pakistan supreme court first before actions? that will sounds lawful!

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

I tend to get more done that way.

Curse what you and anyone gets done selfishly, violating the spirit of the laws we make! All you do is encourage people like bin Laden!

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Why didnt America seeking a death warrant from the Pakistan supreme court first before actions? that will sounds lawful!

So that they could tip off OBL so he could make a stealthy exit. Do you know how ludicrous that sounds?!

Curse what you and anyone gets done selfishly, violating the spirit of the laws we make! All you do is encourage people like bin Laden!

How so?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Well, you had me for a sec, but then I realized I would shoot or otherwise attack anyone that invaded my house with helicopters and guns at the ready. And of course, my bodyguards, if I had any, would be expected to do the same.

No he still has you, that reaction of shooting people who attack you is completely normal anyone would do it, but that can't be used as a means to say that a raid shouldn't take place or that a suspect can't be killed during the raid because of that expected behavior. That would be like saying the SWAT teams are wrong to kill a suspect when they raid a home or a building with their guns ready and helicopters, yes SWAT has helicopters, and the suspect shoots back because of armed SWAT members that come bursting through the doors and windows of the building the he or she was in.

The truth of the matter is that any raid on OBL would have resulted in a firefight. You can't honestly suggest that any attempt to arrest OBL would not have resulted in a firefight. I mean if Pakistani police came up to the complex with an arrest warrant stating they were there to arrest OBL do you honestly think there wouldn't have been a firefight in that scenario?

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Does anybody seriously believe that the two planes hit the twin towers and brought down THREE buildings?

Without "help"? Such as bombs planted in the buildings before the planes hit?

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Ten years ago, Bin Laden (the real one) was on life support. He had kidney failure. Google it if you don't believe me. Without advanced hospital care, he wouldn't have survived two weeks.

Bin Laden died LONG before the US Seals invaded Pakistan.

The data is on the internet.

Seek and ye shall find!

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

It's one thing to unequivocally support the right to free expression; terrorist bombings are NOT covered under that.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Why are we wondering if OBL was guilty or not? Am i the only one that has seen the videos of him claiming credit for the attacks on Al-jazeera? If he didnt do it, he sure sounds like he wishes he did, lol. Anyway, I move do dismiss the case against the United States. It was a crime of passion, hehe. If we had to do it all over again, let me think..... Yup we would do it 10x over! I dont feel bad about it and wont feel bad no matter what is written in this forum! Thanks for playing, the thumbs down button is located right below for your convenience. If it were up to the terrorists, you wouldnt have that freedom either. One last thing I want to mentiong. If the United States ever harbors a self admited and unrepentant murdering terrorist, I would fully support any country comming in and righting that wronge, as long as someone gets the job done!

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Am i the only one that has seen the videos of him claiming credit for the attacks on Al-jazeera? If he didnt do it, he sure sounds like he wishes he did, lol.

So do you speak Arabic? Or do you believe the WH translation of that video? Oh, why do I ask? The WH has never lied to you before! Never, ever!

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

showmethemoney, Al-jazeer translates its own content into many languages, one of which just so happens to be english. Oh what a wonderful, technologically informed world we live in! Im sure you knew that and you were just testing me.... I wouldnt want to accuse anyone of just being ignorant...so i will not.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites