A couple more interesting articles on the subject:
AP: Pakistan: Bin Laden raid sparks resignation calls: http://bit.ly/iUExoT
Gandhi Was in Abbottabad, Too: http://www.progressive.org/ap050511.html
Here is the Dalai Lama article:
Dalai Lama: Speaking at USC, Dalai Lama suggests he condones Osama bin Laden's killing - latimes.com: http://lat.ms/lMSxzl
http://www.guernicamag.com/blog/2652/noam_chomsky_my_reaction_to_os/
I love Noam Chomsky. Different PoVs are essential in this world. But - though I realise this is a serious thread and serious post, he asks in your link:
"We might ask ourselves how we would be reacting if Iraqi commandos landed at George W. Bushs compound, assassinated him, and dumped his body in the Atlantic."
😀 Doesn't even Noam know? (He seems a bit behind the times re presidents and who is in office, but how would we react?) Only kidding, I think. 😀
Getting serious now, I do retain my interest in geopolitics, and without going into any depth, this whole scenario does call into quesstion how the West may now view a supposed ally, Pakistan. I do think that's by far the biggest long-term fall-out that's going to come out of this. Who really rules and who knows what in Pakistan is pretty important.
V
The Ultimate Truth On Bin Laden
Satori,
I'm sorry but you are in America. I understand this news is only available for people within the UK?
I put "news" and "bin Laden" into a search engine and came up with this seemingly final word, open only to UK residents.
For fans it might be considered vital watching.
V
I love Noam Chomsky. Different PoVs are essential in this world. But - though I realise this is a serious thread and serious post, he asks in your link:
"We might ask ourselves how we would be reacting if Iraqi commandos landed at George W. Bushs compound, assassinated him, and dumped his body in the Atlantic."
😀 Doesn't even Noam know? (He seems a bit behind the times re presidents and who is in office, but how would we react?) Only kidding, I think. 😀
No, he's not confused about who's president. He's referring to the fact that George W. Bush is considered a war criminal, just as Osama bin Laden was considered a war criminal. That's why he used that comparison.
Satori,
I'm sorry but you are in America. I understand this news is only available for people within the UK?
I put "news" and "bin Laden" into a search engine and came up with this seemingly final word, open only to UK residents.
For fans it might be considered vital watching.
V
You're right. I wasn't able to watch it.
I was deeply troubled that an unarmed man (whatever crimes he'd committed) had been assassinated, but I heard something yesterday, that did seem to be a justification. If he had been caught alive and taken to the US for trial, how many innocent people might have been taken hostage in an effort to free him?
Also, I totally think that putting his body in the sea, with no possible shrine, was the right thing to do under the circumstances.
Security forces on all sides, in most countries, have assassinated who they consider to be enemies or threats. it certainly happened in N Ireland. It doesn't make it right and I pray for a global rise in consciousness towards a world where we will not need armies or weapons.
Judy
May I just say how interesting these threads are. I learn so much more from HP than from the news 😀
May I just say how interesting these threads are. I learn so much more from HP than from the news 😀
That's right in my opinion. But I've learned an AWFUL lot from HP over time, as you get conflicting political and spiritual views, and eventually have to understand those different views and respect them. I too learn from every post I read here. I've learned since I began. 🙂
Venetian
The thoughts of Benjamin Ferencz, now 91. He was a prosecutors at the Nuremberg trials, and was one of the first to witness the horrors of the concentration camps after the war...
[DLMURL] http://www.benferencz.org/index.php?id=4&article=105 [/DLMURL]
To the Editor:
Your superb report Behind the Hunt for Bin Laden leaves key questions unanswered. Jubilation over the death of the most hunted mass murderer is understandable, but was it really justifiable self-defense, or was it premeditated illegal assassination?
The Nuremberg trials earned worldwide respect by giving Hitlers worst henchmen a fair trial so that truth would be revealed and justice under law would prevail. Secret nonjudicial decisions based on political or military considerations undermine democracy. The public is entitled to know the complete truth.
BENJAMIN B. FERENCZ
New Rochelle, N.Y., May 3, 2011
I looked him up and found that letter to the New York Times after hearing him speak on Radio 4.
Here is the interview with Benjamin Ferencz (51 minutes and 20 seconds into the programme). He gives his thoughts on the killing of Bin Laden.
(Sorry to anyone who can't access this)...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b010xy38
I should mention, for anyone who can't hear the programme, during the interview Mr.Ferencz describes how he held a gun to the head of an SS officer in a concentration camp, and he could have pulled the trigger. He didn't.
I've been reading this thread with interest and trying to resist posting, but I just can't help myself now!
I must say I am one of those who felt uneasy when I saw the images on tv of people in Times Square rejoicing over someones killing. What can I say? Maybe that makes me a pacifist. I don't know. I always thought a pacifist was against violence, but now, from reading this thread, it seems some consider that pacifism means just doing absolutely nothing, not even defending ones self. I think there is a difference. If a spoilt child throws a tantrum and starts hitting you, there is a big difference between (a) doing nothing, (b) restraining them and attempting to use reason or whatever (c) punching their lights out.
Maybe pacifism is for 'the golden age' and not for today in 2011, but how else is this age supposed to come about if people are not talking about it now and striving for it. I believe the more of us want to live that way, the quicker it will happen, and if we just say its not logical to think that way, it makes 'the golden age' approach slower!! After all, in 1711, it would probably have been illogical to talk about an America without slaves and look how quickly that changed.
Also, I seem to remember reading a long thread about 9/11 being a conspiracy (I think it may have been posted by Venetian-apologies if not). Has that theory now been abandoned? Have you considered that if it is true, then that would make Bin Laden a murdered innocent and we have all been massively manipulated......hmmm.....to what end?
Love
Crystal elf
Also, I seem to remember reading a long thread about 9/11 being a conspiracy (I think it may have been posted by Venetian-apologies if not). Has that theory now been abandoned? Have you considered that if it is true, then that would make Bin Laden a murdered innocent and we have all been massively manipulated......hmmm.....to what end?
You've got me there. 🙂 I think I probably started any thread on 9/11. In polls, even 50% of Americans don't believe the given version.
It's a massively complex subject. A lot does not add up. Almost all theorists even agree that al Qaeda was involved (but allowed and known about). So the idea would be that al Qaeda were allowed and used, so that the USA could invade Iraq 'properly'.
Bin Laden was certainly behind many earlier atrocities anyway, which killed hundreds: so it doesn't all hinge on 9/11 at all. He became a bogey-man figure though, for the USA.
The images of Americans in Times Square - (sigh) that's just fairly American. The kind of thing about the USA that Ali G and Borat picked up on excellently. 🙂
To end seriously, being objective about 9/11 as a conspiracy, what really needs looking at is the apparent clear evidence in the towers' dust that all the three towers were brought down by high-tech explosives the globule-remains of which are still in the dust, a study by Swedish scientists mentioned in that thread.
V
I was deeply troubled that an unarmed man (whatever crimes he'd committed) had been assassinated, but I heard something yesterday, that did seem to be a justification. If he had been caught alive and taken to the US for trial, how many innocent people might have been taken hostage in an effort to free him?
Judy
Quite a few of us have expressed the same sentiment about feeling uncomfortable with all of the celebrations over the assassination. Personally, it reminded me of how Al Qaeda celebrated when the twin towers were hit and all of those innocent people lost their lives. While Osama bin Laden was anything but innocent, it was troubling nonetheless to see people celebrating the death of a human being. OBL should have been captured and brought to trial for war crimes in an international court somewhere in Europe, not the U.S.
It's a massively complex subject. A lot does not add up. Almost all theorists even agree that al Qaeda was involved (but allowed and known about). So the idea would be that al Qaeda were allowed and used, so that the USA could invade Iraq 'properly'.
V
That's always been my view, and it's why I've never seen OBL as the "mastermind." He was definitely involved, but I have never believed him to be the sole mastermind.