Can we stop talking about War Man and focus on the subject?
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
Did warman kill osama? Because I see no proof either way.
I'd type my pc specs out all fancy again but teh mods would remove it. Again.
This. Also, is there really any doubt of his guilt? How many videos did he release not only taking credit for murdering and torturing innocent people, but threatening more attacks? Taking him to trial in a pretentious parade to prove just how loving we are would have not only have been circus/rallying call, it would have endangered more innocent lives. Like the man said, it's OBL ffs. Giving him the podium is a strategic face palm. I imagine a kill mission has a lower risk than an apprehend mission. Considering the target it makes sense.Uzique wrote:
at the end of the day people are going to endlessly bitch over human rights (and they have a point and an entitlement too) - but what everyone must (begrudgingly) concede is that this is fucking osama bin laden. it's an exceptional case. international law and all sorts of ethics necesarily go out of the window. should the law be willingly disrespected and discredited? of course not. it has the right to grumble (and should do, too, to keep any credibility). but i think everyone involved really silently acknowleges and implicitly knows that this shit was not going to go any other way. an entire country was out for the blood of a wanted criminal. it's not going to be a model arrest and a show-trial. the dignity and restraint of proper legal conduct goes way out the window... nothing like 9/11 has happened before, and hopefully nothing will ever again (in every respect: the original event, the reaction, and now this furore).11 Bravo wrote:
what level? it has always been and will always be......wanted dead or aliveDonFck wrote:
I'm pretty sure that Osama would've been sentenced to death anyway, man. It's the principle of not lowering one self to the same level.
not sure where these principles you guys speak of come from
Xbone Stormsurgezz
^^agreed with both of you. He was not even protected by our laws AFAIK, he was an enemy combatant.
So Obama is STILL defending the way the body of Bin Laden was treated to the Islamic community. Keeping in mind that supposedly Islam was not being represented by Bin laden and his actions were deplorable in their eyes, yet they are pissed that he might not have been give the respect that he deserved in the eyes of Islam?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookou … respectful
add to it, the fact that nations are worried about Islamic reaction to the release of the death photos of Bin Laden... Now I ask, what other religion or culture in the world would any free nation be so afraid of as to try to censor free press and free speech?
But according to all of you, Islam is no different. that is some kinda denial you are working with there.
Ya know come to think about it, where was the Islamic "sensitivity" to images over charred bodies being hung from a bridge in Iraq, or videos of westerners being beheaded? But this? The dead body of Bin Laden is what we are going to cower to Islam over because we are afraid of offending their delicate sensitivities?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookou … respectful
add to it, the fact that nations are worried about Islamic reaction to the release of the death photos of Bin Laden... Now I ask, what other religion or culture in the world would any free nation be so afraid of as to try to censor free press and free speech?
But according to all of you, Islam is no different. that is some kinda denial you are working with there.
Ya know come to think about it, where was the Islamic "sensitivity" to images over charred bodies being hung from a bridge in Iraq, or videos of westerners being beheaded? But this? The dead body of Bin Laden is what we are going to cower to Islam over because we are afraid of offending their delicate sensitivities?
Last edited by lowing (2011-05-06 02:13:04)
Pretty much agree with this entirely.Uzique wrote:
at the end of the day people are going to endlessly bitch over human rights (and they have a point and an entitlement too) - but what everyone must (begrudgingly) concede is that this is fucking osama bin laden. it's an exceptional case. international law and all sorts of ethics necesarily go out of the window. should the law be willingly disrespected and discredited? of course not. it has the right to grumble (and should do, too, to keep any credibility). but i think everyone involved really silently acknowleges and implicitly knows that this shit was not going to go any other way. an entire country was out for the blood of a wanted criminal. it's not going to be a model arrest and a show-trial. the dignity and restraint of proper legal conduct goes way out the window... nothing like 9/11 has happened before, and hopefully nothing will ever again (in every respect: the original event, the reaction, and now this furore).11 Bravo wrote:
what level? it has always been and will always be......wanted dead or aliveDonFck wrote:
I'm pretty sure that Osama would've been sentenced to death anyway, man. It's the principle of not lowering one self to the same level.
not sure where these principles you guys speak of come from
i mostly agree with both of you, uzi and kmar - on the the core substance of it anyway. however, i really don't like the way they handle this particular case with osama. obama & co must understand - they wouldn't be where they are is they didn't - that they are creating more controvercy and tension with this than they are resolving.i think it was you, kmar, who posted in another thread - and i completely agree with that - that no matter how imperfect our current law is, international law especially, ultimately it's the only thing that binds our societies and human civilization in general together. yeah, there are instances when the law just doesn't cut it, and the way that obl schtick has been played to us it certainly looks like one such case, but wouldn't you agree that these situations do need to be handled with special care? now look what we have here:Kmar wrote:
This. Also, is there really any doubt of his guilt? How many videos did he release not only taking credit for murdering and torturing innocent people, but threatening more attacks? Taking him to trial in a pretentious parade to prove just how loving we are would have not only have been circus/rallying call, it would have endangered more innocent lives. Like the man said, it's OBL ffs. Giving him the podium is a strategic face palm. I imagine a kill mission has a lower risk than an apprehend mission. Considering the target it makes sense.Uzique wrote:
at the end of the day people are going to endlessly bitch over human rights (and they have a point and an entitlement too) - but what everyone must (begrudgingly) concede is that this is fucking osama bin laden. it's an exceptional case. international law and all sorts of ethics necesarily go out of the window. should the law be willingly disrespected and discredited? of course not. it has the right to grumble (and should do, too, to keep any credibility). but i think everyone involved really silently acknowleges and implicitly knows that this shit was not going to go any other way. an entire country was out for the blood of a wanted criminal. it's not going to be a model arrest and a show-trial. the dignity and restraint of proper legal conduct goes way out the window... nothing like 9/11 has happened before, and hopefully nothing will ever again (in every respect: the original event, the reaction, and now this furore).11 Bravo wrote:
what level? it has always been and will always be......wanted dead or alive
not sure where these principles you guys speak of come from
osama's been - let's call a spade a spade - assassinated (or so we are told). then a dna sample has supposedly been taken as proof and the body's been dumped into the sea. and then - what?!? - the president of the united fucking states gets to the podium and says "yo! 'tis been mah carefull designed plan, well done!" - are you fucking kidding me? it looks like of all the possible scenario's they've chosen the one that'd create the most controvercy. what's the point of it anyway - destroying an internationally wanted criminal or boosting obama's approval rating? creating another waive of "mindless patriotism" or inciting yet more tensions between the west and the islamic world? serving justice or spitting it in the face?
i wonder...
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
So the bigger the crime the less the law applies?
I still say Madoff should have been waterboarded.
I still say Madoff should have been waterboarded.
Fuck Israel
i recently finished reading "The Dead Zone", and there's this question:Dilbert_X wrote:
So the bigger the crime the less the law applies?
I still say Madoff should have been waterboarded.
if you could go back in time and had an opportunity to kill hitler, would you do it?
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
whoa whoa wait a second here, this has nothing to do with Islam or the Islamic world remember?Shahter wrote:
i mostly agree with both of you, uzi and kmar - on the the core substance of it anyway. however, i really don't like the way they handle this particular case with osama. obama & co must understand - they wouldn't be where they are is they didn't - that they are creating more controvercy and tension with this than they are resolving.i think it was you, kmar, who posted in another thread - and i completely agree with that - that no matter how imperfect our current law is, international law especially, ultimately it's the only thing that binds our societies and human civilization in general together. yeah, there are instances when the law just doesn't cut it, and the way that obl schtick has been played to us it certainly looks like one such case, but wouldn't you agree that these situations do need to be handled with special care? now look what we have here:Kmar wrote:
This. Also, is there really any doubt of his guilt? How many videos did he release not only taking credit for murdering and torturing innocent people, but threatening more attacks? Taking him to trial in a pretentious parade to prove just how loving we are would have not only have been circus/rallying call, it would have endangered more innocent lives. Like the man said, it's OBL ffs. Giving him the podium is a strategic face palm. I imagine a kill mission has a lower risk than an apprehend mission. Considering the target it makes sense.Uzique wrote:
at the end of the day people are going to endlessly bitch over human rights (and they have a point and an entitlement too) - but what everyone must (begrudgingly) concede is that this is fucking osama bin laden. it's an exceptional case. international law and all sorts of ethics necesarily go out of the window. should the law be willingly disrespected and discredited? of course not. it has the right to grumble (and should do, too, to keep any credibility). but i think everyone involved really silently acknowleges and implicitly knows that this shit was not going to go any other way. an entire country was out for the blood of a wanted criminal. it's not going to be a model arrest and a show-trial. the dignity and restraint of proper legal conduct goes way out the window... nothing like 9/11 has happened before, and hopefully nothing will ever again (in every respect: the original event, the reaction, and now this furore).
osama's been - let's call a spade a spade - assassinated (or so we are told). then a dna sample has supposedly been taken as proof and the body's been dumped into the sea. and then - what?!? - the president of the united fucking states gets to the podium and says "yo! 'tis been mah carefull designed plan, well done!" - are you fucking kidding me? it looks like of all the possible scenario's they've chosen the one that'd create the most controvercy. what's the point of it anyway - destroying an internationally wanted criminal or boosting obama's approval rating? creating another waive of "mindless patriotism" or inciting yet more tensions between the west and the islamic world? serving justice or spitting it in the face?
i wonder...
Basically you are bitching about the very same thing I am questioning? If this has nothing to with Islam, and if OBL actions were not representative of Islam, then there really shouldn't be any controversy at all then should there? But there is. Now all you gotta do is step out of the cover of denial and admit as to why. Why are Muslims pissed at the way his body was treated? Why are Muslims pissed that we killed him?
actually, yes. I will agree to that. The bigger the crime against a society the greater the right that society has to snuff your sorry ass out.Dilbert_X wrote:
So the bigger the crime the less the law applies?
I still say Madoff should have been waterboarded.
I'm guessing he meant Islamic extremists instead of Islam. But you can split hairs if you want.lowing wrote:
whoa whoa wait a second here, this has nothing to do with Islam or the Islamic world remember?Shahter wrote:
i mostly agree with both of you, uzi and kmar - on the the core substance of it anyway. however, i really don't like the way they handle this particular case with osama. obama & co must understand - they wouldn't be where they are is they didn't - that they are creating more controvercy and tension with this than they are resolving.i think it was you, kmar, who posted in another thread - and i completely agree with that - that no matter how imperfect our current law is, international law especially, ultimately it's the only thing that binds our societies and human civilization in general together. yeah, there are instances when the law just doesn't cut it, and the way that obl schtick has been played to us it certainly looks like one such case, but wouldn't you agree that these situations do need to be handled with special care? now look what we have here:Kmar wrote:
This. Also, is there really any doubt of his guilt? How many videos did he release not only taking credit for murdering and torturing innocent people, but threatening more attacks? Taking him to trial in a pretentious parade to prove just how loving we are would have not only have been circus/rallying call, it would have endangered more innocent lives. Like the man said, it's OBL ffs. Giving him the podium is a strategic face palm. I imagine a kill mission has a lower risk than an apprehend mission. Considering the target it makes sense.
osama's been - let's call a spade a spade - assassinated (or so we are told). then a dna sample has supposedly been taken as proof and the body's been dumped into the sea. and then - what?!? - the president of the united fucking states gets to the podium and says "yo! 'tis been mah carefull designed plan, well done!" - are you fucking kidding me? it looks like of all the possible scenario's they've chosen the one that'd create the most controvercy. what's the point of it anyway - destroying an internationally wanted criminal or boosting obama's approval rating? creating another waive of "mindless patriotism" or inciting yet more tensions between the west and the islamic world? serving justice or spitting it in the face?
i wonder...
Basically you are bitching about the very same thing I am questioning? If this has nothing to with Islam, and if OBL actions were not representative of Islam, then there really shouldn't be any controversy at all then should there? But there is. Now all you gotta do is step out of the cover of denial and admit as to why. Why are Muslims pissed at the way his body was treated? Why are Muslims pissed that we killed him?
I need around tree fiddy.
nope, because the future hasn't been written at that point, and you going back might have made the very change needed to prevent his crimes against the world.Shahter wrote:
i recently finished reading "The Dead Zone", and there's this question:Dilbert_X wrote:
So the bigger the crime the less the law applies?
I still say Madoff should have been waterboarded.
if you could go back in time and had an opportunity to kill hitler, would you do it?
I am not spitting hairs, I responded to what he said. and he is absolutely right.DonFck wrote:
I'm guessing he meant Islamic extremists instead of Islam. But you can split hairs if you want.lowing wrote:
whoa whoa wait a second here, this has nothing to do with Islam or the Islamic world remember?Shahter wrote:
i mostly agree with both of you, uzi and kmar - on the the core substance of it anyway. however, i really don't like the way they handle this particular case with osama. obama & co must understand - they wouldn't be where they are is they didn't - that they are creating more controvercy and tension with this than they are resolving.i think it was you, kmar, who posted in another thread - and i completely agree with that - that no matter how imperfect our current law is, international law especially, ultimately it's the only thing that binds our societies and human civilization in general together. yeah, there are instances when the law just doesn't cut it, and the way that obl schtick has been played to us it certainly looks like one such case, but wouldn't you agree that these situations do need to be handled with special care? now look what we have here:
osama's been - let's call a spade a spade - assassinated (or so we are told). then a dna sample has supposedly been taken as proof and the body's been dumped into the sea. and then - what?!? - the president of the united fucking states gets to the podium and says "yo! 'tis been mah carefull designed plan, well done!" - are you fucking kidding me? it looks like of all the possible scenario's they've chosen the one that'd create the most controvercy. what's the point of it anyway - destroying an internationally wanted criminal or boosting obama's approval rating? creating another waive of "mindless patriotism" or inciting yet more tensions between the west and the islamic world? serving justice or spitting it in the face?
i wonder...
Basically you are bitching about the very same thing I am questioning? If this has nothing to with Islam, and if OBL actions were not representative of Islam, then there really shouldn't be any controversy at all then should there? But there is. Now all you gotta do is step out of the cover of denial and admit as to why. Why are Muslims pissed at the way his body was treated? Why are Muslims pissed that we killed him?
It isn't just the extremists that are pissed plenty of articles prove that. The Islamic world is questioning the way we treated OBL's body. It is a fact that OBL's death pics are not going to be released for fear of offending Islamic sensibilities.
Why don't you address what I had posted? Can you deny that free nations are censoring themselves out of free press and free speech for fear of Islamic reaction? What other groups id pandered to in such a fashion? and it is claimed Islam is no different than any other culture and religion.
i'm not a muslim but i'm pissed all the same (though i'm not sure if you actually killed him). i understand why you'd do it, mind you, but the way it's been handled is simply outrageous.lowing wrote:
whoa whoa wait a second here, this has nothing to do with Islam or the Islamic world remember?
Basically you are bitching about the very same thing I am questioning? If this has nothing to with Islam, and if OBL actions were not representative of Islam, then there really shouldn't be any controversy at all then should there? But there is. Now all you gotta do is step out of the cover of denial and admit as to why. Why are Muslims pissed at the way his body was treated? Why are Muslims pissed that we killed him?
as to why muslims would be especially pissed: well, aside from being portrayed an internationally wanted terrorist, obl was also a pretty popular imam, very knowledgable in the ways of islam and he used his influence to certain ends. did he represents the whole of islam? no. is it possible at all for a single person to represent a religion such as islam? no.
move along, lowing. nothing to see here.
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
ok you do realize that is "moderate" muslims that are pissed right? We are not talking about suicide bombers here.Shahter wrote:
i'm not a muslim but i'm pissed all the same (though i'm not sure if you actually killed him). i understand why you'd do it, mind you, but the way it's been handled is simply outrageous.lowing wrote:
whoa whoa wait a second here, this has nothing to do with Islam or the Islamic world remember?
Basically you are bitching about the very same thing I am questioning? If this has nothing to with Islam, and if OBL actions were not representative of Islam, then there really shouldn't be any controversy at all then should there? But there is. Now all you gotta do is step out of the cover of denial and admit as to why. Why are Muslims pissed at the way his body was treated? Why are Muslims pissed that we killed him?
as to why muslims would be especially pissed: well, aside from being portrayed an internationally wanted terrorist, obl was also a pretty popular imam, very knowledgable in the ways of islam and he used his influence to certain ends. did he represents the whole of islam? no. is it possible at all for a single person to represent a religion such as islam? no.
move along, lowing. nothing to see here.
Islamic world leaders:lowing wrote:
It isn't just the extremists that are pissed plenty of articles prove that. The Islamic world is questioning the way we treated OBL's body. It is a fact that OBL's death pics are not going to be released for fear of offending Islamic sensibilities.
Hamid Karzai - Afghan president wrote:
The killing of bin Laden is very "important news". The Taliban must learn a lesson from this. The Taliban should refrain from fighting. The war against terrorism is in its sources, in its financial sources, its sanctuaries, in its training bases, not in Afghanistan
Pakistan Foreign Office wrote:
The death of bin Laden is a "major setback to terrorist organisations around the world".
Yousuf Raza Gilani - Pakistani prime minister wrote:
We will not allow our soil to be used against any other country for terrorism and therefore I think it's a great victory, it's a success and I congratulate the success of this operation
Ghassan Khatib - Palestine Authority spokesman wrote:
Getting rid of Bin Laden is good for the cause of peace worldwide but what counts is to overcome the discourse and the methods - the violent methods - that were created and encouraged by bin Laden and others in the world.
Saad Hariri - Lebanon's prime minister wrote:
The history of our nationalism and Islam will never forgive that man who was a black mark for two decades, filling the minds of youngsters with ideas about terrorism, murder and destruction.
Islamic extreme groups:Hoshyar Zebari - Iraq's foreign minister wrote:
We, like many people in the world, are delighted to see an end to his mentality and his devious ideology.
Thousands of Iraqis were murdered and killed because of his ideologies.
Ehsanullah Ehsan - Pakistani Taliban spokesman wrote:
If he has been martyred, we will avenge his death and launch attacks against American and Pakistani governments and their security forces.
SourceIsmail Haniyeh - head of Hamas in the Gaza Strip wrote:
We condemn the assassination and the killing of an Arab holy warrior. We ask God to offer him
mercy with the true believers and the martyrs.
Doesn't look like the whole Islamic world is against this, but only the extreme groups.
I need around tree fiddy.
yes. they are pissed because one of their faith has been assassinated and denied the proper burial. move along.lowing wrote:
ok you do realize that is "moderate" muslims that are pissed right? We are not talking about suicide bombers here.Shahter wrote:
i'm not a muslim but i'm pissed all the same (though i'm not sure if you actually killed him). i understand why you'd do it, mind you, but the way it's been handled is simply outrageous.lowing wrote:
whoa whoa wait a second here, this has nothing to do with Islam or the Islamic world remember?
Basically you are bitching about the very same thing I am questioning? If this has nothing to with Islam, and if OBL actions were not representative of Islam, then there really shouldn't be any controversy at all then should there? But there is. Now all you gotta do is step out of the cover of denial and admit as to why. Why are Muslims pissed at the way his body was treated? Why are Muslims pissed that we killed him?
as to why muslims would be especially pissed: well, aside from being portrayed an internationally wanted terrorist, obl was also a pretty popular imam, very knowledgable in the ways of islam and he used his influence to certain ends. did he represents the whole of islam? no. is it possible at all for a single person to represent a religion such as islam? no.
move along, lowing. nothing to see here.
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
http://www.dawn.com/2011/05/06/hencefor … rules.html
Oh, and lowing in saying Hamas/Taliban = everyone in the ME shocker
One can hope.We in Pakistan may shed tears of indignation but they will mean nothing; we are suffering for our skewed security policies that now endanger our very survival.
How have we reached this lamentable stage? The problem lies in our narrative of statehood. We take pride in considering Pakistan as an Islamic state.
Clearly, religious right and wrong cannot be made the basis of state management for that is best run on the principles of expediency and political purpose. Sultan Alauddin Khilji understood this 700 years ago when he declared that he did not know whether or not what he commanded was permitted under Sharia law. Thus, he gave commands that he considered were of benefit to the country and appeared opportune under the circumstances. He did not know whether that pleased God or not.
By declaring Pakistan an Islamic state, we have exposed ourselves to huge risks to the state. When we mix our national narrative with religion, we permit international issues to enter our political sphere — if any problem of an Islamic dimension arises anywhere in the world, it automatically becomes Pakistan’s problem. This also allows others to indulge in proxy wars of a sectarian nature within Pakistan.
Bin Laden said that he was creating an Islamic caliphate and was fighting the US since it subverted Muslim countries and guided their policies. He hoped that what he set in motion on 9/11 would start an Islamic revolution, resulting in the establishment of a caliphate.
That did not happen. He must have been quite dejected when he saw the motivating force of the recent uprisings in the Middle East. The mass revolutions in the Arab world over the past four months showed that Al Qaeda was politically inconsequential.
As Robert Fisk noted, “During the past few months, millions of Arab Muslims rose up and were prepared for their own martyrdom — not for Islam but for freedom and liberty and democracy. Bin Laden didn’t get rid of the tyrants. The people did.
And they didn’t want a caliph.” This sums up the tragedy of Bin Laden. He
had become irrelevant for a large majority of Muslims since many of them chose secular values of freedom and liberty, not an Islamic caliphate.
Pakistan and its leaders must learn from Bin Laden’s failure and understand that the future lies in dealing with problems related to freedom and liberty, rather than jihad and coercion. If we refuse to transform, we will not be a viable nation — we will rapidly descend into dysfunction and chaos. The choice is clear.
The writer is chairman of the Regional Institute of Policy Research in Peshawar.
Oh, and lowing in saying Hamas/Taliban = everyone in the ME shocker
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
I wouldn't waste your time Don, you're better off arguing against a brick wall.
Ummm this board has gone to great lengths to emphasize OBL had nothing to do with Islam. Plenty of Christians are killed and no other Christians give so much a fuck about it that a nation is willing suppress free press and free speech out of fear of Christ reprisals. So what makes Islam so different?Shahter wrote:
yes. they are pissed because one of their faith has been assassinated and denied the proper burial. move along.lowing wrote:
ok you do realize that is "moderate" muslims that are pissed right? We are not talking about suicide bombers here.Shahter wrote:
i'm not a muslim but i'm pissed all the same (though i'm not sure if you actually killed him). i understand why you'd do it, mind you, but the way it's been handled is simply outrageous.
as to why muslims would be especially pissed: well, aside from being portrayed an internationally wanted terrorist, obl was also a pretty popular imam, very knowledgable in the ways of islam and he used his influence to certain ends. did he represents the whole of islam? no. is it possible at all for a single person to represent a religion such as islam? no.
move along, lowing. nothing to see here.
Spark, it is more than Hamas and Taliban and I never said it included EVERYONE in the ME. Try again and address what I did say. OR can't you?Spark wrote:
http://www.dawn.com/2011/05/06/henceforth-a-new-set-of-rules.htmlOne can hope.We in Pakistan may shed tears of indignation but they will mean nothing; we are suffering for our skewed security policies that now endanger our very survival.
How have we reached this lamentable stage? The problem lies in our narrative of statehood. We take pride in considering Pakistan as an Islamic state.
Clearly, religious right and wrong cannot be made the basis of state management for that is best run on the principles of expediency and political purpose. Sultan Alauddin Khilji understood this 700 years ago when he declared that he did not know whether or not what he commanded was permitted under Sharia law. Thus, he gave commands that he considered were of benefit to the country and appeared opportune under the circumstances. He did not know whether that pleased God or not.
By declaring Pakistan an Islamic state, we have exposed ourselves to huge risks to the state. When we mix our national narrative with religion, we permit international issues to enter our political sphere — if any problem of an Islamic dimension arises anywhere in the world, it automatically becomes Pakistan’s problem. This also allows others to indulge in proxy wars of a sectarian nature within Pakistan.
Bin Laden said that he was creating an Islamic caliphate and was fighting the US since it subverted Muslim countries and guided their policies. He hoped that what he set in motion on 9/11 would start an Islamic revolution, resulting in the establishment of a caliphate.
That did not happen. He must have been quite dejected when he saw the motivating force of the recent uprisings in the Middle East. The mass revolutions in the Arab world over the past four months showed that Al Qaeda was politically inconsequential.
As Robert Fisk noted, “During the past few months, millions of Arab Muslims rose up and were prepared for their own martyrdom — not for Islam but for freedom and liberty and democracy. Bin Laden didn’t get rid of the tyrants. The people did.
And they didn’t want a caliph.” This sums up the tragedy of Bin Laden. He
had become irrelevant for a large majority of Muslims since many of them chose secular values of freedom and liberty, not an Islamic caliphate.
Pakistan and its leaders must learn from Bin Laden’s failure and understand that the future lies in dealing with problems related to freedom and liberty, rather than jihad and coercion. If we refuse to transform, we will not be a viable nation — we will rapidly descend into dysfunction and chaos. The choice is clear.
The writer is chairman of the Regional Institute of Policy Research in Peshawar.
Oh, and lowing in saying Hamas/Taliban = everyone in the ME shocker
Not really, just argue against what I actually post for once and then see what happens. I am not however going to let anyone plant what I did not say into an argument then tell me I am wrong and here is why..... Argue that the US is not releasing the pics out of fear of offending Islamic sensibilities. Argue that such action is NOT abandoning free speech and free press. Argue that that sort of action is taken all of the time to the lengths such as is this cowering to Islam. Argue that it is ONLY the extremists that are pissed about the treatment of the body or even the killing of OBL. Argue that it is right that Islamic sensibilities are delicate regarding the pics of OBL with no evidence of the same sensibilities when Americans were burned and hung from a bridge in Iraq...THere ya go, lets have it.Sturgeon wrote:
I wouldn't waste your time Don, you're better off arguing against a brick wall.
Last edited by lowing (2011-05-06 03:55:17)
http://www.dawn.com/2011/05/03/truth-will-out.html
we will ask where the ghairat of the ‘Ghairat Brigades’ was, when four foreign helicopters crossed our border and after flying for an hour over our ‘sovereign’ territory, swooped onto Abbottabad; whilst we will definitely ask where our ‘self-respect’ is; now that the Americans have done what they said they would do if they had the intelligence — go after who they consider their enemies no matter where they are holed up — it is more important to ask why our much-vaunted Deep State didn’t know Osama bin Laden was living in Abbottabad Cantonment all these years?
And to ask why everyone and Charlie’s aunt in the security establishment went blue and red with anger when told that Osama and his close advisers were hiding in Pakistan?
Why, yours truly has been called a traitor deserving of death when I suggested that only given what the establishment itself told us about Osama’s failing kidneys and need for regular dialysis there was no way he was living in a cave on some remote mountain. Why indeed, did the Commando puff out his chest and glare at Hamid Karzai when the Afghan president suggested that Al Qaeda’s top leadership was hiding in Pakistan? Why the stout denial all these years?
From news that is filtering out, CNN with the help of Google maps, already told us early on Monday morning London time, that Osama was living with his youngest wife and some other members of his family and tens of armed guards in a house eight times bigger than all the other houses in the area: walls 12 feet high; no telephone connection; no cellphone signals emitting from the house, et al.
I mention this because the quite preposterous house should have stuck out like a sore thumb and been the subject of some suspicion on the part of the Mother of All Agencies which routinely bugs people’s telephones and has the equipment to pinpoint a cellphone to within 10 metres.
However, we are being told to believe that no one in Pakistan, not the Hazara police, not the IB, not the ISI, not MI, had the slightest idea just who lived in that absurd house located not far from the Pakistan Military Academy where officer cadets, the future leaders of the Pakistan Army, are trained. (Incidentally, where, not a week ago, the COAS asserted that the army had broken the back of the terrorists!) Indeed, one should have thought that a cantonment with not only this academy but three regimental centres which train recruits and turn them into soldiers should have been a most sensitive station. I can only say if they didn’t know, why didn’t they know? The truth will out one day.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
easy to answer.........They DID know, and they were hiding him and lying to the US about it all..... pretty much explains everything. Got any other theories?Spark wrote:
http://www.dawn.com/2011/05/03/truth-will-out.htmlwe will ask where the ghairat of the ‘Ghairat Brigades’ was, when four foreign helicopters crossed our border and after flying for an hour over our ‘sovereign’ territory, swooped onto Abbottabad; whilst we will definitely ask where our ‘self-respect’ is; now that the Americans have done what they said they would do if they had the intelligence — go after who they consider their enemies no matter where they are holed up — it is more important to ask why our much-vaunted Deep State didn’t know Osama bin Laden was living in Abbottabad Cantonment all these years?
And to ask why everyone and Charlie’s aunt in the security establishment went blue and red with anger when told that Osama and his close advisers were hiding in Pakistan?
Why, yours truly has been called a traitor deserving of death when I suggested that only given what the establishment itself told us about Osama’s failing kidneys and need for regular dialysis there was no way he was living in a cave on some remote mountain. Why indeed, did the Commando puff out his chest and glare at Hamid Karzai when the Afghan president suggested that Al Qaeda’s top leadership was hiding in Pakistan? Why the stout denial all these years?
From news that is filtering out, CNN with the help of Google maps, already told us early on Monday morning London time, that Osama was living with his youngest wife and some other members of his family and tens of armed guards in a house eight times bigger than all the other houses in the area: walls 12 feet high; no telephone connection; no cellphone signals emitting from the house, et al.
I mention this because the quite preposterous house should have stuck out like a sore thumb and been the subject of some suspicion on the part of the Mother of All Agencies which routinely bugs people’s telephones and has the equipment to pinpoint a cellphone to within 10 metres.
However, we are being told to believe that no one in Pakistan, not the Hazara police, not the IB, not the ISI, not MI, had the slightest idea just who lived in that absurd house located not far from the Pakistan Military Academy where officer cadets, the future leaders of the Pakistan Army, are trained. (Incidentally, where, not a week ago, the COAS asserted that the army had broken the back of the terrorists!) Indeed, one should have thought that a cantonment with not only this academy but three regimental centres which train recruits and turn them into soldiers should have been a most sensitive station. I can only say if they didn’t know, why didn’t they know? The truth will out one day.