Ground Zero remembered

[seamus finn]

Just in case anybody might feel some sympathy for Bin Laden after the 'gruesome' proof-of-death pictures are published by the US government, remember what this man was responsible for. Here are some Ground Zero details taken in September, 2004.

[Rob C]

I take your point, and it's a good one; however, the religious symbolism in the shots you published is part of the problem. When you get down to the nitty gritty, it becomes an illustration of that of which Mick Jagger sang: "can't be a man 'cause he doesn't smoke the same cigarettes as me..."

Gasoline has bugger all to do with it.

Rob C

[EduPerez]

While I feel zero sympathy for this man, I must confess that the idea of someone being executed, in a foreign country, and without a previous trial, scares the hell out of me...

[stamper]

While I feel zero sympathy for this man, I must confess that the idea of someone being executed, in a foreign country, and without a previous trial, scares the hell out of me...

To boost the President's poll ratings?

[Rob C]

While I feel zero sympathy for this man, I must confess that the idea of someone being executed, in a foreign country, and without a previous trial, scares the hell out of me...

Don't be afraid; you have to have been held responsible for something far more dangerous than photographing some interesting old industrial buildings and the odd bloom!

Rob C

[Rob C]

To boost the President's poll ratings?

Nah, doesn't fly: they have long memories and will never forget the 'rescue' in Iran... egg; face; not good publicity - a risk too far for not a lot of payback. But it does show what can be done if you watch Steven Seagal movies a lot; more to seals than skin for small ships.

Rob C

[Christoph C. Feldhaim]

Just in case anybody might feel some sympathy for Bin Laden after the 'gruesome' proof-of-death pictures are published by the US government, remember what this man was responsible for. Here are some Ground Zero details taken in September, 2004.

I completely do not feel any sympathy with Mr. Bin Laden, but I would have preferred any measurement being executed in the form of a proper legal trial. We do not do ourselves any good, if we circumvent our own values when fighting terrorism. Same with the drones flying around and killing people without any trial. While I understand there is some desperation in the fight in this unsymmetric war I'd rather prefer our values and legal systems not getting corrupted in the course.
/just my 0.02$

[RSL]

Christoph, The man's sitting there plotting and carrying out mass murders using people who neither wear a uniform nor abide by military conventions and you want a standard civilian trial for him where military secrets must come out into the open as part of the defense? If a man's facing you with a loaded gun do you shoot first or suggest he first submit to a trial? Your response makes it very clear you've never been near combat. Shooting back when someone shoots at you is not circumventing your own values.

[Christoph C. Feldhaim]

This is a difficult discussion.
And of course - I wasn't there.

But revenge never helped or solved anything.
Even if it was simple self defense in the course of the operation, preferable would have been a trial.

Guantanamo Bay, drones, innocent peoples lives destroyed as an acceptable collateral damage in the war against terrorism ....
Maybe we should wipe out mankind - no more criminals, terrorists, child molesters, politicians, ......

Launch the nukes!

[RSL]

Christoph, Revenge??? Have you read what the guy was doing when they took him out? Is killing your enemy in war "revenge?" Yes, there shouldn't be any war, "give peace a chance," and all that crap, but the fact is, there is war and you can fight or you can surrender. No other choices exist.

[louoates]

Christoph, Revenge??? Have you read what the guy was doing when they took him out? Is killing your enemy in war "revenge?" Yes, there shouldn't be any war, "give peace a chance," and all that crap, but the fact is, there is war and you can fight or you can surrender. No other choices exist.

Agree 100%

[Christoph C. Feldhaim]

I think we shouldn't mix up things, which easily happens with this highly "charged" topic.

Of course - I do NOT morally judge against the legitimation of self defense !!!
If the soldiers in the operation had no chance to stay safe than by killing Bin Laden - then be it so.
To me it appears so, that we still have to wait for information about what exactly happened.
If I overlook it right, there is contradictory or at least questionable information around and I'd wish the US government would practise a more open information policy.

Whatever happened in the course of the events when Bin Laden was killed - I still would stand to say I prefer he could have been taken alive and brought to trial. Time will tell (hopefully).

In any case - the war against terrorism has done something with the world which I don't like. And security issues - as important as they are - appear to get abused for something different. I believe Guantanamo Bay and the excessive usage of drones to remotely kill people without trial are   such examples. In the history of mankind there often have been "good reasons" to justify and do things which were not so good in the end.

Again: Nothing against real self defense ...

[Rob C]

Chris, your failure is to expect the world to run according to sunbscribed values: it isn't like that. Run a business for a week and you realise that isn't how anything works. Run it for a year, and you either give up and join the queue at the labour exchange or, if lucky, find a job with somebody more realistic than yourself and become one of those drones you speak of, but in human terms.

The reality of life is that you deal with people as they deal with you.

Donning boxing gloves and chatting about Queensberry ain't gonna save your skin on any street corner, and if you don't think the world isn't a huge such corner, you don't think, you haven't had to think, or you just haven't been anywhere.

How easily folks forget the joy and celebration that our 'victim' displayed back in the day of the Towers...

Rob C

[stamper]

If a helicopter with Iraqis on board sets down on George Bushes ranch and they "execute" him for starting the war in Iraqi then what would the reaction be? Justifiable or would  a revenge seeking operation get underway? Read a good one the other day. In the week that Obama published a copy of his birth certificate to prove his existence Durex sent a letter to George apologizing for his existence. 

[Christoph C. Feldhaim]

Chris, your failure is to expect the world to run according to sunbscribed values: it isn't like that.

Wrong!
Just because things do not always run according to specific values it does not mean values have no value and everything or any means is allowed. There is always the possibility of choice. Thats freedom. Taking the right choices, even if the circumstances are difficult. Choices in the course of the fight against terrorism are surely tough choices, and these choices are based on values. And there are conflicts between values - harsh conflicts - thats why the choices are to tough to take. I don't want to claim I would have taken better choices. But I want to stress there are choices and I see a danger of some values getting heavily damaged in the course.

I don't see Bin Laden as a a "victim". But we might become the victim in the process of our choices. Fortunately we also have a certain freedom of choice how we conduct that process. Man views are possible here. After all no one has the one and only truth .....

[stamper]

Chris, you have a medical background in dealing with people? Is it your opinion that an event, such as the killing of Bin Laden, will REALLY help a person grieving a lost one in a long term way? Or will the "joy" be very short lived and the suffering carries on regardless.

[Christoph C. Feldhaim]

Psycologically I believe a sort of compensation can be helpful, but not in the way of killing a criminal.
I am also strictly against death penalty for various reasons.
Compensation could be something like an excuse in less severe cases, for example.
Or an acknowledgement of the suffering of a victim by the court and the society.
There are many possibilities. It is very difficult.
Punishment should not have the function to lie the loss one suffers.
Nothing is brought back or repaired.

I have great respect for the feelings of the Americans after the disastrous 9/11.
Bin Laden was an evil terrorist who had brought much suffering to many innocent people and he had to be prosecuted, of course ...
There are many evil people in this world.

But as I see it, the danger is huge, that people doing bad things, be it criminals, terrorists,
(drug addicts, strangers, gay people, communists, punks, homeless, successless, witches, jews, protestants, catholics ...)  
or whoever serve a role for the internal stability of society, and the danger of abuse by "justified prosecution" is great.
Nothing stabilizes more and distracts more from internal problems than a common enemy !!!!

It would have been a sign of a mature constitutional society to have brought Bin Laden to trial
instead of killing him (we'll leaveout the self defense aspect in the course of the attempted arrest here).
This chance is now lost.

And when I see the pornographic way, how some newspapers exploit the death of Bin Laden I feel plain disgust.

[Justan]

> …some newspapers exploit …

A lot of what newspapers do is exploitation.

Desiring to prosecute OBL is a great ideal. It was done with SH and he and several others were tried and hanged.

While not making a defence, warfare has its own ideals and takes its trophies as it can.

It is also good that the US President declined to publish photos.

[seamus finn]

It is also good that the US President declined to publish photos.

+1

[Rob C]

+1

+1

It (publishing) wouldn't do a positive thing other than satisfy the public curiosity which is sometimes confused with the public interest, and the negative possibilities would be huge.

I think there is no case for making a connection between this guy and:

 "But as I see it, the danger is huge, that people doing bad things, be it criminals, terrorists, (drug addicts, strangers, gay people, communists, punks, homeless, successless, witches, jews, protestants, catholics ...)" 

Binbaby was a one-off, a guy who could sell a message. As I wrote somewhere else, I don't believe it has anything to do with that old whipping boy, oil. It's everything to do with fundamentalism and that, of any colour, is trouble for everybody. I observe no hint of any middle-eastern country wanting to stop selling the west that vital commodity, oil; they all do very very well out of moving it from there to here; it's the last thing they'd choose to deny us, so how can folks make the mental leap into thinking and, worse, believing the worn out cliché that 'it's all about oil'? Hell, it's mainly western money men that drive and control prices and destroy economies when they blow it.

I don't know about Durex sending apologies... that's a pretty rash business plan! Another case for blowing it, perhaps.

Rob C