Osama Bin Laden is dead | Died four years ago

[ANWAR]

I still very very much disagree with you, because the very parties who have been voted in have done nothing but still maintain those clauses in the constitution that discriminate between Muslims and non-Muslims in Pakistan..Or am I wrong?

Those laws have existed right since the time of Zia and have had seen absolutely no attempt of changes in the country. Every single speech given by the likes of Benazir Bhutto, Nawaz Sharif, Musharraf during that time period contain 'InshAllahs'... or am I wrong there?

Firstly, if you look at Pakistan's history, it was originally modelled on the Turkish model of secularism, it was never intended to be an Islamic country. That is important to note. Secondly, the discriminatory laws that have been put in, have been put in by DICTATORS, not democratically elected governments. Zia has caused a lot of damage to Pakistan and it was he who began the process of radicalising the country, helped along by the US of course.

Now that the chickens have come home to roost, it is too late to change anything, however, the people of Pakistan should not be blamed for this as they had no choice in the matter.

The word InshAllah means God willing, even the likes of David Cameron express some sort of religious undertones in their speeches, does it make them religious nutters?

Heck the very party of Nawaz Sharif has the title "MUSLIM" in the name!

Angela Merkel's party has the title 'CHRISTIAN' in its name, using your standards, it must be a religious extremist party.

The PPP refer to Zulfiaqar Ali Bhutto as 'Shaheed'
PPP's party manifesto...

Shaheed means martyr or hero, you must be deaf if you haven't heard those words used in the secular west.

"Islam is our religion; democracy is our politics; socialism is our economy; power lies with the people."

Again, another strawman argument, the politicians will do anything to get votes and usually they go with the mood of the country. Currently, thanks to the overwhelming feck ups that have been burdened upon the people, they are swinging towards extremism and the politicians are using this to gain an advantage. Examples in the west would be in the 80's, when the conservatives had the slogan 'if you want a n****r for a neighbour, vote labour' or what is happening in France right now.

Do I need to even go into Zia ul Haq's Islamization of Pakistan during his era?

How very secular is any of that?!
These are the sort of leaders Pakistan and its people have been electing consistently for years and years and years..

Get yourself a text book on Pakistani history and you'll probably notice that not one elected leader has completed a full term in power, so to say that they have been voting these people for years and years is a bit of a stretch.

Pakistan throughout its history has spent an awful lot of time under military dictatorship, it has been forced to do things that its populace clearly doesn't want, it has suffered a great deal in the last decade, so is it any wonder that the people are behaving as they are. Look at the way the Americans reacted when 9/11 happened, look at how right wing it made them, Pakistanis have been living with that sort of thing every single day for the last decade.

I find it extradonary that even after all the crap that they've put up with, the religious parties combines still get below 10% of the votes.

 

[ha_rooney]

Don't need to act like the terrorists. If those pricks want to glorify the murder of innocent people doesn't mean we have to nor should we. I think it's a wise move by the US not to release the pictures.

 

[Neutral]

<<Imagine how the American people would react if al-Qaida killed one of our troops or military leaders, and put photos of the body on the internet.>>

Umm... they have... including some live beheadings.

I don't agree with the move. The images need to be released. I'd rather hear the nuts claim fake photos than a cover-up.

Maybe Julian Assange and his mob will come to the rescue

 

[rednev]

I think the most sensible move would be to show the photos in a private screening to Congress and selected members of the world's media. For now, at least, just to weigh down on the growing level of conspiracy theory. The photo will have to be released eventually, though.

 

[wr8_utd]

Obama says pictures shall not be released

 

[Raoul]

Probably the right call. Seeing Bin Ladin's skull partially blown off will be more inflammatory than insightful.

 

[ha_rooney]

I think they have already showed pictures to members of Congress, doubt they'll show the press anything.

 

[MrMarcello]

Watching CNN feed at work...

The guy talking was speaking to attorneys and other people in Pakistan and they want to see an image as the overwhelming belief is that OBL wasn't there and this was a fabrication by the US and their gov't. Many cited to this guy that it was for political reasons. Very interesting.

 

[Untied]

So… pics or didn't happen.

Bait

 

[hungrywing]

The first one is hilarious. What conspiracy loons miss is that if someone like Jones had concrete proof, he'd be eliminated. Right? Isn't that what a dark, shadowy gov't would do to someone like him?

Alex Jones, age 10.

Spoiler

That being said, he does raise awareness of certain issues like GM crops and whatnot.

 

[iSparky]

i wonder how long before we see a call of duty map for this, i want one!!

 

[MiamiSpartan]

Bush and Blair have been responsible for far more deaths. Obama and Cameron probably will be.

Your point? I merely said that families of the thousands that Bin Laden killed certainly find his death relevant. I would think that if Bush, Blair, Obama, or Cameron were killed by Al Qaeda that their deaths would be relevant to a lot of families in the Middle East, as well.

AQ was already like that with Osama in hiding. I can't image his death shifting its organisational structure much, if at all. With no internet or phone connection and only couriers to pass on messages, he can't have been playing that much of a role anymore.

And his impact on recruiting? Fundraising? His own personal fortune? Yes, recruiting might be bumped in the short term for the sake of revenge for his death, but over the long haul that is likely to dwindle unless they get another leader that is as charismatic, and that draws something approaching OBL's notoriety.

Add to that the irrelevance of AQ in the popular uprisings in the Middle East, and there is a far better option being seen for the disaffected youth.

It's by no means the end of AQ or terrorism, but it will be very difficult for AQ to be better or stronger over the long term.

 

[crappycraperson]

You missed the whole point of my post but never mind. The people of Pakistan have traditionally been very secular, this is reflected in their voting as religious parties altogether gain less than 10% of the votes. This is a historical FACT, not you, your friends or your family can argue this. It is even confirmed in the following article;
Pakistan: Why Religious Extremism Unnerves Secular Leaders - TIME

Just to reiterate so that maybe you can understand, I mentioned that the tide is turning and that Pakistan is moving towards extremism, giving the example of Salman Taseer to help my case. The survey that you posted actually proves my point but I guess that was lost on you...

It would help if next time you try and understand the whole post rather than focusing on one line.

Fact is that unlike India where the Muslim minority's population has sustained or increased since partition, minorities in Pakistan have suffered and diminished greatly since 1947. Just because a decent percentage of population have secular mindset does not excuse that. And that is not something that just happened recently. Yes, in India as well we have had cases like Gujrat and Muslim community as whole still needs more upliftment. But these issues pale in comparision to state of minorities in Pakistan. Just look at they treated people in East Pakistan before Bangladesh was born. Also a state which proclaims to be Islamic Republic, can not be secular per-say.

All of it happened under a military dictator excuse does not awash as well. Democratic Govt.s have succeeded such dictators and have made no attempt to rectify the damage done by them. Also Pakistan have allowed themselves to be vulnerable to military coups by over empowering them due to obsession with India.

 

[olesmyhero]

I'm surprised how little this has been brought up wherever I've been.

 

[Red-Indian]

Firstly, if you look at Pakistan's history, it was originally modelled on the Turkish model of secularism, it was never intended to be an Islamic country. That is important to note. Secondly, the discriminatory laws that have been put in, have been put in by DICTATORS, not democratically elected governments. Zia has caused a lot of damage to Pakistan and it was he who began the process of radicalising the country, helped along by the US of course.

Now that the chickens have come home to roost, it is too late to change anything, however, the people of Pakistan should not be blamed for this as they had no choice in the matter.

The word InshAllah means God willing, even the likes of David Cameron express some sort of religious undertones in their speeches, does it make them religious nutters?



Angela Merkel's party has the title 'CHRISTIAN' in its name, using your standards, it must be a religious extremist party.



Shaheed means martyr or hero, you must be deaf if you haven't heard those words used in the secular west.



Again, another strawman argument, the politicians will do anything to get votes and usually they go with the mood of the country. Currently, thanks to the overwhelming feck ups that have been burdened upon the people, they are swinging towards extremism and the politicians are using this to gain an advantage. Examples in the west would be in the 80's, when the conservatives had the slogan 'if you want a n****r for a neighbour, vote labour' or what is happening in France right now.




Get yourself a text book on Pakistani history and you'll probably notice that not one elected leader has completed a full term in power, so to say that they have been voting these people for years and years is a bit of a stretch.

Pakistan throughout its history has spent an awful lot of time under military dictatorship, it has been forced to do things that its populace clearly doesn't want, it has suffered a great deal in the last decade, so is it any wonder that the people are behaving as they are. Look at the way the Americans reacted when 9/11 happened, look at how right wing it made them, Pakistanis have been living with that sort of thing every single day for the last decade.

I find it extradonary that even after all the crap that they've put up with, the religious parties combines still get below 10% of the votes.

Zain's points are badly made but there's no arguing that Pakistan was always a prime candidate for radicalisation. The very basis of their existence is that the Muslims of the sub-continent need a separate country. Its very difficult to create a secular state starting from that basis.

The urban elite including the founder of the nation Jinna and the likes of his Bhutto and his daughter may have been secular but i'd say they lived in a bit of a bubble.

The fact that religious parties didn't manage to win a big percentage of the vote is neither here nor there. In a country where every party proclaims itself religious, the question is only one of degree. No party protested Zia's blasphemy laws. They were the one thing about his dictatorship that recieved near unanimous acclaim.

 

[GE]

Just heard they are refusing to release photos. Yet there was no problem when they got Saddam and his sons.

This is all probably a load of bollox.

 

[rednev]

Donald Trump now has new reason to live.

 

[Rahul]

Exactly. No problem releasing a video of Saddam being hung by the neck, but a dead Bin Laden is pushing it too far ?

 

[Sir Matt]

The Iraqi government carried out that execution and released the photos. Saddam's sons were patched up before the pictures were taken so they didn't look so gruesome. There isn't much patching up a huge hole in Osama's face though without taking lots of time(longer than 24 hours).

Edit: See rednev's post.

 

[rednev]

Just heard they are refusing to release photos. Yet there was no problem when they got Saddam and his sons.

This is all probably a load of bollox.

Exactly. No problem releasing a video of Saddam being hung by the neck, but a dead Bin Laden is pushing it too far ?

Saddam was hanged by Iraq. And the footage was filmed and released by a rogue Iraqi soldier/security official at the hanging. Cameras were not even supposed to be present in the room.

 

[GE]

Saddam was hanged by Iraq. And the footage was filmed and released by a rogue Iraqi soldier/security official at the hanging. Cameras were not even supposed to be present in the room.

Ah, that clears things up a little.

These conspiracies will drag on for years and years. We'd forget about the whole thing within a week of photographic evidence being released. Well done to the troops, well done to the president, the public and media would be satisfied, but the government has to make things complicated as usual

 

[wr8_utd]

Finally some images!

VERY GRAPHIC:

Spoiler

 

[redwhiteblack]

So how long had he been dead before he was 'buried at sea'?

It's all really weird isn't it. Good timing for Obama though with the election campaigns coming around, damn good timing.

 

[Silva]

So how long had he been dead before he was 'buried at sea'?

Apparently it took the Americans a long time to bury Bin Laden at sea.

Every time they dug some water out, the hole filled back up.

 

[iSparky]

Finally some images!

VERY GRAPHIC:

Spoiler

still none of bin laden though?

 

[Silva]

So, a picture of a man with a bullet wound on his chin isn't too graphic, but one with a bullet wound about 6 inches higher is?

 

[wr8_utd]

So, a picture of a man with a bullet wound on his chin isn't too graphic, but one with a bullet wound about 6 inches higher is?

These were leaked to Reuters though and not "officially" released.

 

[GE]

Finally some images!

Who's that guy?

If those photos of the dead person are actually from the compound firefight then the Bin Laden ones will leak sooner or later.

 

[wr8_utd]

Who's that guy?

If those photos of the dead person are actually from the compound firefight then the Bin Laden ones will leak sooner or later.

An image obtained by Reuters shows the outside of Osama bin Laden's Abbottabad complex shortly after the U.S. raid that killed the al Qaeda leader. Reuters says it obtained the images from a Pakistani guard who entered the compound in the early morning hours of Monday, May 2.

These were after Osama's body was carried.

 

[ha_rooney]

Wonder if these pictures were taken by the US or by Pak authorities?

Edit: Pak guard, I doubt we'll see any bin Laden photos leak anytime soon.

 

[Sultan]

The US attorneys remarks today are interesting with claims he was a lawful target because he was the “enemy commander in the field and the operation”, and the operation was conducted in a way that was consistent with US laws and values.

US government sources have been consistent for the last ten years Guantanamo was for persons alleged to be unlawful combatants, and their mistreatment of prisoners, and denial of rights under the Geneva Conventions was based on these claims. Since when did Osama become a commander, and who did he represent? Surely if previous claims were correct and he was an unlawful combatant the first objective should have been to have taken him alive.

I also disagree this killing is consistent with US values. USA is about justice, which means taking someone to court, and acting on evidence provided. Anyway, I do think it was best all round it ended the way it did – I’m sure Osama would not have wanted to be captured and the US will not have wanted a circus.

 

[GE]

An image obtained by Reuters shows the outside of Osama bin Laden's Abbottabad complex shortly after the U.S. raid that killed the al Qaeda leader. Reuters says it obtained the images from a Pakistani guard who entered the compound in the early morning hours of Monday, May 2.

These were after Osama's body was carried.

Cheers.

Wonder if these pictures were taken by the US or by Pak authorities?

Edit: Pak guard, I doubt we'll see any bin Laden photos leak anytime soon.

Yeah, you're right.

 

[Sultan]

Who's that guy?

If those photos of the dead person are actually from the compound firefight then the Bin Laden ones will leak sooner or later.

Probably the owner of the compound, or the couriers. There was also reports other families lived on the compound.

 

[Sultan]

What's the fascination with wanting to see images of a dead person?

 

[GE]

What's the fascination with wanting to see images of a dead person?

Proof!

 

[Scoreboard Red]

What's the fascination with wanting to see images of a dead person?

Same fascination in Heat readers wanting to see Kerry Katona in a tracksuit shopping in Tescos, I don't see the fascination but imagine it's morbid curiosity.

 

[Grinner]

Rolling Stone published more gruesome pics of dead Afghans for the Kill Team story. What was weird was that in the same issue they blurred a pic of a dildo. They also failed to censor Rihanna's big ugly fivehead.

 

[Spoony]

Rolling Stone published more gruesome pics of dead Afghans for the Kill Team story. What was weird was that in the same issue they blurred a pic of a dildo. They also failed to censor Rihanna's big ugly fivehead.

Reminds me of that South Park episode, the one where Cartman thought he had invisible powers and as a consequence walked around naked(invisibility doesn't stretch to clothes, something to do with the law of physics.... ).

 

[Commadus]

The US attorneys remarks today are interesting with claims he was a lawful target because he was the “enemy commander in the field and the operation”, and the operation was conducted in a way that was consistent with US laws and values.

US government sources have been consistent for the last ten years Guantanamo was for persons alleged to be unlawful combatants, and their mistreatment of prisoners, and denial of rights under the Geneva Conventions was based on these claims. Since when did Osama become a commander, and who did he represent? Surely if previous claims were correct and he was an unlawful combatant the first objective should have been to have taken him alive.

I also disagree this killing is consistent with US values. USA is about justice, which means taking someone to court, and acting on evidence provided. Anyway, I do think it was best all round it ended the way it did – I’m sure Osama would not have wanted to be captured and the US will not have wanted a circus.

Even Superman the defender of US values was considering renouncing his US citizenship!

 

[Commadus]

So who would win in a fight?

Seals/Delta Force vs SAS vs Spetznaz ?