Greens compare US to terrorists
May 3rd, 2011 at 8:31 am by David FarrarGreen co-leader Russel Norman tweeted:
Call me old fashioned but aren’t we different to terrorists because we don’t assassinate people and we adhere to rule of law?
As most of the world celebrates, the Greens demonise the United States.
Does Dr Norman think that the US should have knocked on the front door of the highly fortified compound, and asked bin Laden to come out and surrender? That would have probably resulted in a death toll of hundreds – and possibly lead to bin Laden escaping.
When will the Greens realse that heading up a terrorist army is not the same thing as being some thug who held up a dairy with a gun.
The US action was legal under US law. It was authorised, and bin Laden was a legitimate military target. Again, he was not some bank robber, but head of a global army of terrorists.
Also Dr Norman misses the key point of terrorists. Terrorists deliberately attack civilians and the more dead civilians the more sucessful they deem their attack to be. In military operations, the more dead civilians, the bigger the failure it has been.
Related posts:
- Don’t call the terrorists names
- Greens say NZ should welcome terrorists
- Not unspeakably evil
- Greens v Mana
May 3rd, 2011 at 8:35 am
Dr Norman/The Greens always miss the point, except THEIR point.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 8:39 am
Live by the sword, die by the sword.
This isn’t a game of tiddlywinks.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 8:41 am
The Luddite co-leader is an awoved communist and hates the United States with a passion (although it wasn’t an obstacle to get an all-expenses paid junket courtesy of the Americans). His comments are par for the course.
The Green Party should be kept away from power.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 8:43 am
I am also interested in Hone’s news item:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=in3dErz-u2w&feature=youtu.be
Orange: Hey Hone?
Hone: What?
Orange: Political suicide, hahahhahaa!
Orange: Hey Hone?
Hone: What!!?
Orange: Oh no wait you already did that last week! Hahaha!
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 8:46 am
And yet this idiot would have us believe he is fit for office?
Cue: Tui Billboard.
Sheesh.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 8:48 am
He was probably depressed that Hone called him a whiny Australian or some such on radio yesterday.
Hone, Hone, look at me, look at me, I am wadical too.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 8:49 am
Wussel also fails to realize that taking Osama alive would have would have resulted in numerous hostage taking by extremist muslims with the aim of freeing Osama in the bargaining. With political parties of the far left decrying his human rights being denied.
Maybe they like that idea.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 8:49 am
The Greens are the enemy within.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 8:51 am
I find Fisk’s argument quite compelling – namely that Osama was not in any real sense “the leader” of Al Qaeda since the movement isn’t really an organisation. It has never had a “leader”.
But I suppose “US assassinates symbolic figurehead of Al Qaeda” doesn’t really have the same headline value.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 8:55 am
Terrorists celebrate when the innocent are killed, the civilised west celebrates when those terrorists are killed.
Which group is russell noman in?
Fisk is now and always has been a complete left wing terrorist cuddling fucktard.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:00 am
I reckon Dr Norman will be paying for his own lunch next time he’s in Washington.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:00 am
Has the NZ Muslim community come out and celebrated the death of the POS yet? Or even tacitly agreed with the action?
[DPF: Yes a member of the NZ Council of Islamic Federations welcome the death of Osama, pointing out he has also killed many Muslims]
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:00 am
Fisk also said the people in the Arab states aren’t interested in the sort of Islamic caliphate(?) Alqueda wanted. This basic gravity (from the masses) would apply to the Green Party: there is no way in hell the general public want to live in a country where people with indigenous ancestry own the foreshore and seabed.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:01 am
Au contraire. I think we should be praising the Greens as sticking to their principles: their beliefs about the US and how the world should work, the supremacy of “International Law” over the small-minded decisions made by democratic peoples.
After all, prominent lefty Glen Greenwald recently complained bitterly that Obama has now fully accepted Bush’s anti-terror and foreign policies, whatever gloss of sophistry they might try to place over it.
So it’s going to be a fun day watching various left-wingers wriggle uncomfortably between the Scylla of their desperate need to trumpet Obama and the Charybdis of all the Bush-like methods used here that they were so outraged about so recently: invading the sovereign territory of another nation, extrajudicial killings, rendition, FISA wiretaps, Gitmo, CIA “black” prisons in foreign countries, etc.
We should feel grateful that at least one small part of the left have remained true to themselves. As I said yesterday, I’m confident that most will manage to swamp principles with partisanship.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:06 am
@Bevan 8:49 am
And assassinating him and burying him at sea in contravention of Islamic burial traditions makes him a martyr and increases the likelihood of terrorist attacks to avenge his death.
There’s a more extensive quote from Russel in the NZ Herald:
I agree.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:08 am
Norman would have had a lot of pressure behind the scenes, after all what sort of group promotes (eg) a Catherine Delahunty to 4th on the list?
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:09 am
Call me old fashioned but aren’t we different to terrorists because we don’t assassinate people and we adhere to rule of law?”
I absolutely agree with Russel Norman.
When Governments of Nation States don’t act any differently to ‘terrorist’ groups or a vigilante lynch mob – we are in SERIOUS trouble.
What if the roles were reversed?
Some ‘terrorist’ group assassinates George Bush for war crimes, like invading Iraq, (with the ‘coalition of the willing’) to enforce a regime change because Saddam Hussain ‘had weapons of mass destruction’ – (which was proven to be a LIE )- executes him and dumps his body out at sea and thousands of Iraqis are filmed waving their flags and dancing in the streets?
How would YOU think about THAT?
Hypocrisy like this – just make me want to puke……….
Penny Bright
Vote:http://waterpressure.wordpress.com
May 3rd, 2011 at 9:10 am
It was inevitable that Mr. Fisk would attempt to downplay what must be seen as a significant event. Even if bin-Laden was a “symbolic” leader of a group that has a “scattered leadership” the effect of his removal must be seen as a huge propaganda victory if nothing more. I have yet to be convinced – as Mr. Fisk seems to be – that the days of al-Quaeda and funadamentalist terroristism are over. Perhaps Mr Fisk missed the start of the spring campaign in Afghanistan which was marked, not by a military offensive, but by a 12 year old boy blowing himself up.
On another note, the issue of bin-Laden was never going to be solved in a Court of Law. As has been said, to take him alive would have resulted in a rash of hostage taking and the involvement of innocent citizens of any number of countries. And where would he get a “fair trial”. The evidence against him was overwhelming – much of it coming from his own finger-waving videos. Assassination cannot be a moral outcome but can moral force be used against an amoral adversary. Perhaps bin-Laden’s role as a terrorist leader provides slightly more justification. Certainly real-politick provides a lot. So when are the Special Forces going to have a look at Gaddafi? And what about the Syrians whose contempt for democracy is well known. That is the problem when you start down the assassination track. It seems like such an easy solution and a lot cheaper than the George W Bush approach of invasion without an exit strategy.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:13 am
goddam the greens are wimps. that includes you toad.
smarmy lil bastards sitting in peaceful New Zealand telling us how the world should act.
im glad they killed him (like most sane people) and would have happily pulled the trigger myself.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:19 am
Penny: Orange!! Orange!!? Orange!!!?
Orange: WHHAAAATTTT!!!!? Oh God, knife!!!!!! PLEASE!!!!
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:19 am
tom hunter @ 9.01am
…”I’m confident that most will manage to swamp principles with partisanship.”
When dealing with highly principled people such as the Greens it pays not to underrate their commitment to the Party’s ideals. It would be worth noting that their co leader’s sense of loyalty to the cause is such that it may take a three course dinner to change his allegiances.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:21 am
Sticking to their principles Tom? Where does taking free trips from American benefactors fit those principles?
The problem isn’t solcialists sticking to their “principles”, we can all see that. We can also see what those “principles” are. And they are repugnant.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:24 am
I could not agree more Murray.
I just prefer to see those principles out in the open, promulgated by people who truly believe – and with a clear field of fire around them!
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:24 am
What a shock, the clinically insane Penny is all over Wusslle like a cheap suit. There you go Wusslle, you’ve got the nutter vote.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:25 am
Toad
Is Russell in full spin mode given he has been caught cuddling up to the Yanks?…and, do you have anything to say about the way John Hatfield slammed Comrade Russell on the radio yesterday?
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:29 am
Toad,
Vote:The idea was to take the man alive.
Unfortunately he didn’t want to co-operate.
Bang!
Penny, governments have been behaving like this since time immemorial, the persians, the greeks, the romans, the byzantines, the turks, the british, the french, and now the yanks (to name but a few).
Whats new.
May 3rd, 2011 at 9:29 am
Maybe next time Russell should go in and show the Americans how it should have been done.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:31 am
When Governments of Nation States don’t act any differently to ‘terrorist’ groups or a vigilante lynch mob – we are in SERIOUS trouble.
Vote:……….
In reality Nation states, whether they are good or whether they are bad, their ultimate legitimacy is their strength. I.e it is legitimate for them to do it to preserve the status quo.
May 3rd, 2011 at 9:31 am
Quote “The US action was legal under US law”
Really this is a meaningless statement
The only thing that makes actions legal in a worldly sense is the threat that my gun is bigger than your gun.
Vote:Simple
May 3rd, 2011 at 9:39 am
When pussy leftists thing sitting on their hands and allowing terrorist to dictate to them what they should do and allowing those terrorist to murder their nations citizens without bdeing held to account think they should be permitted to hold the responibility of a nations security we really need to question our mental helth policy of allowing the mentally enfeebled to remain at large in the community.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:39 am
Perhaps DPF should look up the meaning of “overreaction”.
But doing a bit of Fisking (a strange term, seeming to signify “to parse’, with intent to rebut, yet I’ve never seen Fisk credibly rebutted):
It seems to me all that tweet asks is whether we should hold ourselves to higher standards than the criminals. I’m sure many in the US will be asking the same question, and I’m equally sure they will get the same hysterical response.
Ah, the old “either/or” fallacy – works everytime, so long as one knows ones audience for what it is, stoopid. This operation was carefully and cleverly planned, and its successful execution (pun intended) a credit to the skill of the troops involved. DPF’s alternate scenario just insults an obviously very professional team.
But! it does appear that after quelling (killing) the small resistance the troops met, they found a quiescent Bin Laden in a (bed?) room and could quite easily have prised his protective and self-sacrificing wife out of his arms and put the frail old man into a chopper.
Irrelevant. the action wasn’t carried out in the US and International law trumps local law (unless the local is a superpower).
DPF demonstrates woeful ignorance of the facts. There was never any such entity, regardless of Dubya’s propaganda.
The real either/or non-fallacy was actually capture or kill, and utu won the day. Utu was actually ordered at the commencement of the mission, according to reports.
More hyperbole, the ragtag al Qaeda is hardly an army – that’s just propaganda. And after 10 years of relentless killings and disruption by the west, what’s left? And the rest is a false equivalence. The police go after the thug, not the crack troops. Especially when part of the operation is to covertly enter another country, commit an act that would usually be called murder, and escape in time to avoid interception.
Yes, well, there have been quite a few of those lately, haven’t there? Like Iraq, one million dead civilians later – hey, hang on, isn’t Iraq a success?
Summing up, all DPF needed to say was that in his view, the end justifies the means.
That’s fair comment and carries considerable merit, and does not demonise another for holding a different view.
My personal view on this little storm in a teacup, though, is that Dr Norman should have kept his own counsel, at least for now – you’re on a hiding to nothing on this one, Russ!.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:40 am
They asked Sue Bradford for her opinion on Osamas death.
She said she was not happy.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:40 am
Ok we all get it, the leftist self appointed interlectual elite of New Zealand think killing Bin Laden was a bad thing. Thanks guys, just in time for the voters to make their minds up.
Way to increase your appeal.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:46 am
Luc Hansen Says:
Lucs (predictably) mad. Send a wreath Luc: “a lantern in my heart has been snuffed/ stuffed”)
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:48 am
# Murray (7,416) Says:
May 3rd, 2011 at 9:24 am
What a shock, the clinically insane Penny is all over Wusslle like a cheap suit. There you go Wusslle, you’ve got the nutter vote.”
So Murray – you don’t believe in the ‘Rule of Law’?
Penny Bright
Vote:http://waterpressure.wordpress.com
May 3rd, 2011 at 9:48 am
International politics and terrorism can be a dirty business – sometimes necessarily, as in this case. Trying to portray it as a shining example of justice is a nonsense. Obama’s speech closed with:
That is crap. God has nothing to do with it apart from being a potential antagonist. And Animal Farmism applies:
Liberty and justice for all of those who we decide are with us, not against us.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:49 am
`The infallible Keith Locke test of political compass bearing was always to go in the opposite direction from Keith Locke to find a sensible position. Keith Locke is retiring and we now have the Russel Norman or simply just the Green compass test. The Greens ALWAYS point in the wrong direction. If ever you are undecided on any issue then truth lies in the opposite approach to the Greens. Perhaps this is why the Greens have NEVER been in Government. Perhaps this is why the Greens are the only party in parliament that has NEVER been in government. Perhaps people don’t know that a vote for the Greens is ALWAYS a wasted vote. If in November you have half a mind to vote Green then apparently that’s all you need. If you have a whole mind then you want a strong stable John Key led government and will vote National. Thank you.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:53 am
Some more observations on this matter.
US spokesman accuses Osama of hiding in a million dollar mansion while his men get down and dirty in the frontlines.
Hmm, was Obama on one of the choppers?
And same person accuses Osama of using his wife as a human shield.
Hmm, suppose Obama comes under attack and his bodyguard throws himself over Obama to sacrifice his life for his revered boss.
Headline the next day: Cowardly Obama hides behind defenceless security guard.
I suspect Osama’s wife was imploring the troops not to kill her aging husband, preferring to visit him in jail than at his grave.
My only point in all this is – watch out for the spin!
I get lessons from an expert, Bill O’Reilly, who perpetrates the biggest sham on TV: his “No-spin zone”.
Spinning wheel, got to go round…
A final thought:
The war on terror is dead
Long live the war on terror
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:54 am
Apparently the operation was led by the aboriginal members of the USA special task-force, hired for their expert tracking skills.
Unfortunately, they broke into a local bottle shop nearby and unbeknown to the special USA task force were off their faces and singing as they climbed over the high walls.
When confronted by a group of drunken aboriginals Bin Laden, seemingly totally relaxed and unworried said to them, “Yes, I am Bin! Hahaha!”
Instinctively one of the aboriginals thought, it’s Sunday, and yelled “Hey, where’s your wheely bin!!?”
At that point, Bin drew his weapon and the rest is history.
Thank God for those brave Australians.
Sorry, I am going to sleep very soon.
I promise.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:54 am
Yup Pete @ 9.48 that is probably so..But I know that I would rather be with the Americans than with mass murdering muslim terrorists. Or for that matter leftie white guilt ridden apologists.
If it means turning a whole lot more terrorists and masss murderers into burley, so be it. There is price for everything, the greater the crime the greater the price.
Actions = Consequence. Thats what we teach our chldren isn’t it?
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:55 am
Disgraceful and shameful comments from a disgusting individual. Comrade Norman is not, and will never be, fit to govern!
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:58 am
One again the Greens show they live in a fantasy land.
Pete, as you said, international politics is dirty business. It’s imperfect. The Americans (do you actually know any? Have you ever lived there? I do, I have) do not believe their nation is perfect, nor do they believe that their justice is perfect. But they do believe they do the best to be just, and they believe theirs is one of the best examples on the planet. And by best examples, I mean being a superpower and being just. Little ol’ NZ and Russell Norman can crow about how it ought to be, but the reality is that NZ is nation that has very little international responsibility and the Greens will never actually have power and responsibility, so they will never have to deal with the reality that justice will never be perfect.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:01 am
Interesting, Obama is the 9th head of state to pronounce Osama’s death:
http://www.corbettreport.com/osama-bin-laden-pronounced-dead-for-the-ninth-time/
On topic, who cares what the Greens think?
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:02 am
Greens who?
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:03 am
Shouldn’t they have brought these concerns up at the free lunches they’ve been having with the American ambassador?
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:04 am
The Americans (do you actually know any? Have you ever lived there?
I know some, and I’ve been there working and also visiting my brother who has lived there for fifteen years.
Actions = Consequence. Thats what we teach our chldren isn’t it?
Ah, sort of – we try to teach them that if someone looks at you in a way you don’t like as you are leaving a bar you are not supposed to kick their head in. Our kids get many mixed signals.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:06 am
Aging husband?
Vote:He was 53. Just coming into his prime.
May 3rd, 2011 at 10:06 am
Why are idealist human rights activists using an environmental vehicle for their filibustering? If they are not an environmentalist party why are they called the Greens? And what have they done for the environment that has not gone directly into the face of commercial interests?
Vote:Norman and Locke et.al. should resign form the “Green” party and start their own called Communist Amnesty NZ Party, and see if they can pick any votes up that way. Leave those who actually care about the environment to take a more centrist stance and see how their polling goes from there.
May 3rd, 2011 at 10:08 am
They say that one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter.
I am happy that the Americans are my freedom fighters.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:12 am
Couldn’t agree more Pete.
There should be no consequence for no action, stands to reason to reasonable people like you & me.
But for an action like mass murder etc, the consquence must match the crime, sometimes with final & summary violence.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:15 am
Russel Norman says
Nor is it “very becoming” for the co-leader of the third-largest party in the Parliament to protest within the precincts of Parliament towards a visiting leader who is a guest of his country.
Pot; meet kettle Mr Norman
http://keepingstock.blogspot.com/2011/05/tuesday-quote-3-may-2011.html
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:24 am
The US state is the world’s biggest terrorist. They’ve killed hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women and children to terrorise the world and win comfort for themselves. I find it repellant to see so many of them dancing and rejoicing in the streets over the death of a human being, even an enemy. It seems they’ve elevated the most judgemental elements of the Old Testament to replace Jesus’ commandment, yet they still call themselves Christian. The US is not a Christian nation, it is a gang of evil, repellant thugs.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:25 am
Pete,
Are you asserting that US foreign policy is basically “if someone looks at you in a way you don’t like as you are leaving a bar you can kick their head in.”?
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:25 am
@alex Masterley 9:29 am
Stuff reports:
That doesn’t equate with your suggesstion that “the idea was to take the man alive”. I suspect the last thing the US wanted was a trial.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:26 am
And assassinating him and burying him at sea in contravention of Islamic burial traditions makes him a martyr and increases the likelihood of terrorist attacks to avenge his death.
A few questions Toad?
Where is your proof this was an assassination, not an attempt to apprehend where the fugitive resisted?
Would you rather a shrine for the worlds terrorists to worship at?
Please point to proof that his sea burial was in contravention to Islamic tradition? All reports I have seen suggest it was.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:26 am
“They say that one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter.”
Anybody who says that is an idiot. Terrorism is terrorism, it ain’t a matter of the politics. And while killing Bin Laden might have been an own goal, it wasn’t terrorism.
“The Luddite co-leader is an awoved communist … Fisk is now and always has been a complete left wing terrorist cuddling fucktard.”
Once again, the response of KiwiBlog commentators is to anyone they disagree with is to indulge in caricatures. Never mind reality, here’s my favourite fantasy.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:29 am
The claim that this in anyway violates international “law” or that it makes the US morally equivalent to the terrorists is totally false. The opinion by morally retarted far left propagandists such as “toad”, a member of a party that openly supports terrorists and whose foriegn affaiys spokesman is a Pol Pot fan, shows an utter lack of factual knowledge, intelligence, rationality, and yes even compassion. It is people like “toad” and Penny not so bright who have provided monsters like Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Slobadan Milosovich and now Osama bin Laden with support in the West.
SHAMEFUL.
Rabid Jew hater and terrorist supporter Luc Hanson also opines:
“Irrelevant. the action wasn’t carried out in the US and International law trumps local law (unless the local is a superpower).”
False.
“Over the past decade, international law has evolved in such a way as to justify such direct interventions, if only we could act more quickly on the thicket of protocols and deliberations we have invented. The International Criminal Court which oversaw the trial of Serbian war criminal Slobodan Milosevic, has indicted sitting heads of state such as Omar Bashir of Sudan. The Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine, ratified in 2005 by the United Nations General Assembly in 2005, sets forth a process for determining whether the international community can be obligated to intervene to prevent crimes against humanity.
Where bin Laden was killed The core principle behind these institutions and treaties is that sovereignty is a responsibility, not a privilege. This applies not only to dictators and terrorist fugitives, but to the governments that give them safe harbor.
It is no secret that Osama bin Laden was hiding in plain sight in various locales in Pakistan for the past decade. While some have argued that this operation should be spun as having been conducted by Pakistani forces or disgruntled al Qaeda members would have let the Pakistani army off the hook from answering the difficult questions it must now face. Instead, this operation has sent a clear reminder to the many porous and poorly governed states that serve as safe havens for terrorist and criminal fugitives that others will extend the law into their territories if they fail to do so themselves.”
http://edition.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/05/02/khanna.obl.assassination/index.html?hpt=C1
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:30 am
Yes, the same trial the vile and barbaric savage Osama Bin Laden gave his victims on September 11, 2001.
Vote:Your and your leader’s pandering to the islamo-fascists is sickening.
May 3rd, 2011 at 10:31 am
They actually found Bin Laden in an old biscuit factory.
Vote:He was hiding behind the afghans!!!
May 3rd, 2011 at 10:35 am
No EWS, I was not asserting that, I was talking about how some of us try and teach our kids not to be violent thugs but we see international thuggery all the time.
I think the US is better to have as ally, and there are far worse around, but US foreign policy has been very hypocritical and selective, and often ruthless – to the extent that thay have actively encouraged terrorism when it suited them.
And to an extent the US reaps what they sow. Obama applauded the fact they took out bin Laden with no loss of US lives. He is of course referring to the single surprise attack, not the war that’s been going on since last century and has resulted in thosuands of US deaths. They have also had huge inconvenience (eg at airports) and costs incurred.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:36 am
I saw a program about Somali pirates and the Royal Navy. The RN had to watch as they took a tanker away.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:38 am
FFS it’s not hard
Terrorism – targeting your violence at “innocent bystanders” to use terror to bring about political change in others.
Not terrorism – targeting your violence durectly at the opposing force’s military, militia or leadership.
Are Russel et al really too thick to get that, or are they pretending?
/not commenting on the morality of either
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:38 am
Toad
Why do you (and the Greens in general) persist with the lie that you “do not hate the USA”?
You people hate the USA and everything it stands for, you give comfort to terrorists whose sole purpose in life is to wipe the western world from the face of the earth.
What is even more incredible is that you fucking idiots think you can negotiate with these terrorist thugs.
Why not just tell the truth for once in your dishonest life?
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:38 am
Rabid Jew hater Luc Hansen opines:
“My only point in all this is – watch out for the spin!”
The only spin is coming from people like you, “toad”, Wussell Norman and Penny not so Bright.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:40 am
Luc must be a godsend to left-wing protest groups. All you have to do is feed him a few lines, stick him in the front, provide him with sex and food, and he’ll loudly, mindlessly bray those lines all day, to whit:
Ahem (I’ve split the original Guardian comment into separate lines for clearer reader enjoyment!)
These factual idiocies brought to you by a man who is proclaimed as having lived in the Middle East for thirty years, having an intimate knowledge of the region, and boasts a PhD. Given the shaky factual underpinnings of Fisk’s “thinking” you can understand how predictions like this could arise:
But Luc Hansen’s confidence as a reader of Fisk is undermined in no way and he has never seen him “credibly” rebutted, which is what you would expect from a man who claims that he has never felt any shame for any cause he has supported.
To be fair to Luc, his fealty to Fisk is probably based less on having similar intellectual capacities but on similar feelings, as exhibited by perhaps the gold standard of Fiskianism as he wrote of his beating at the hands of Afghans in 2001.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:40 am
Bryla I am a New Zealander but I guess I must be an “evil, repellant thug” as I was absolutely buzzing when I heard the news! I only wish I could be there in New York or Washington to join the party. An evil, piece of fundamentalist shite who had declared war on the civilised world (and who gloated over the deaths of thousands of innocent civilians) is dead. Wussel and Bryla- Cry me a fucking river.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:53 am
Lee01
Gratuitous personal attacks apart (although your real name would be gratefully accepted so I can instruct my lawyer), I’m sure you understand that these are matters for lawyers to decide. The case is not hopeless. The US still stands as the only country convicted of terrorism by the international courts.
But the really short answer is: try the same action in the US or Russia or China and see how far your appeal to international law gets you – a final resting place close to Osama, I would say.
Nookin
re age: such a life takes a toll on a man.
However, he’s dead, he knew it was coming eventually, and he is now with Allah.
Happy ending all round, really.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:56 am
I have some sympathy for Russel’s position. I only wish he could be as consistent when considering the due process and legal rights of people who are not terrorists. New Zealanders, for example. Russel and his cohort seem determined to abrogate every last property right of the capitalist class. Yet here he is defending bin Laden’s right to due process.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:56 am
Is it possible to censure a party?
The Greens need to be told very clearly that this sort of behaviour is abhorrent if they want to remain members of our society.
But then, what changes.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:57 am
Hear hear, DPF.
Osama Bin Laden used covert operatives to wreak violence, death and destruction in foreign countries, to try to influence public attitudes and change government policy in those countries.
The United States government would never do anything like that.
Shame on you, Russell Norman
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 11:00 am
Tom
This what you are reduced to – typos and lesser sins?
Sorry mate, laughable stuff.
I wondered if anyone bothered to run it past Fisk
When is your great tome coming out, Tom?
Let me guess at the title:
The Best Arab is dead Arab.
Close?
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 11:00 am
@Longknives
Bryla’s diatribe was so OTT I suspect it was a wind up. Nobody is that full of blind hate
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 11:01 am
So Hone says we should look for the good in Bin Laden, but only sees Hitler in Don Brash. Go figure.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 11:01 am
Think of it this way – it’s a big boys game and big boys rules apply.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 11:02 am
More Fisk bullshit.
Yeah, I am sure that had Osama been captured, he would have made America really, really really angry by spilling the beans on what happened in the 80′s. He just wasn’t prepared to do that up until now and besides, he had more important things to talk about on his tapes like Climate Change
Also in the Herald editorial today, Fisk was waxing lyrically about how Bin Laden was a great guy because he built roads.
Vote:My question for the far left is how come it is okay when Bin Laden builds roads but not Steven Joyce?
May 3rd, 2011 at 11:05 am
In view of the widespread controversy as to the legality of this action The United Nations should appoint an independent Commission of Inquiry into the incident. Sir Geoffrey Palmer would be available to head it once he completes his investigation into the Iraeli boarding of the Protest Boat affair.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 11:05 am
@Lance, what was so blind about it?
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 11:05 am
Bryla’s diatribe was so OTT I suspect it was a wind up. Nobody is that full of blind hate
Lance for someone with a touch under 700 posts, you really are a noob!
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 11:08 am
“Gratuitous personal attacks”
I made none to you. You are a rabid Jew hater. That is simply a statement of fact.
“although your real name”
My real name is Lee.
“so I can instruct my lawyer”
Ah, the standard response of a snivelling coward. Instruct away. Anyone who repeatedly tells lies concerning Israel and the Jewish people, and you have, is a Jew hater.
The only moral difference between people like you and the Neo-Nazi scum who hang out at Stormfront is they at least have the small shred of integrity to be honest about their hate, whereas cowards like you hide behind bullshit anti-Israeli propaganda.
” I’m sure you understand that these are matters for lawyers to decide.”
Then why are you commenting on them? Are you a lawyer? Are you an expert in International Law? If not the why make claims about the US in regards to the justified killing of Osama?
“But the really short answer is: try the same action in the US or Russia or China and see how far your appeal to international law gets you”
I’m not appealing to international “law”, you and others here were, I was merely pointing out that your claims that it somehow vioalted such law was false, and you have now hypocritically bactracked and claimed “oh, its a matter for lawers”.
But thats your standard tactic on this site. You make bold claims (lies and extreme-left propaganda) on a subject, then when your claim is exposed as highly subjective opinion and propaganda you change your tune to cover the lie.
Personally, I could not care one whit for passes for international law. I believe in doing what is right when confronted by organisations like Al-Qaeda and that means hunting them down by whatever means necessary and wherever the cowards hide.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 11:08 am
If ever this voter wanted proof that the Greens in NZ had lost their way, this is it.
First we had Russell Norman wagging his finger at the USA trying to tell them that they should have taken the No 1 terrorist in the world alive. WAKE UP! The obvious issue with this suggestion is that the idiot extremists would have immediately taken as many western hostages as possible in an effort to get Bin Laden released. Where would that have taken us?
Then, predictably we have the “Wussell supporters” coming out behind their hero all pushing the ‘USA = bad’ theory and conveniently sidestepping the fact that the hypocritical Norman was OK with the principle of having a free lunch in Washington courtesy of the US taxpayer but now they are ‘bad’ because they did the world a favour and took out the biggest terrorist of all time. Some even take this a stage further by calling the USA thugs etc. What a sick description – but a typical one from the idiots who have infiltrated the Green party and think that their views (and their views alone) are paramount.
I’ve had a gutsful of the Greens. Once upon a time they represented a collective that pushed the environmental message and as such they won support from a cross section of NZ. But now they have been exposed for what they are – a bunch of communists in drag who use bullshit based propaganda in a manner that would have made Goebels proud.
I, for one am very grateful that the USA has done the world a favour. If that means that I am now tarred with the same brush that the communists and dissidents use to describe anyone who thinks their views are bollocks, then so be it. Its a mantle that I will happily wear – so thank you America for a job well done.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 11:13 am
Tom, I don’t have time to work through your list of Fisk’s ‘mistakes’ but some are trivial (his/her – you’d be hard pressed to find any recent book without a similar typo – proof reading isn’t what it used to be), some are points of dispute (fires in Moscow may at times have been set deliberately by Russians, but may have been out-of-control accidents by Napoleon’s army squatting in a town with no effective fire brigade or administration) and some are just splitting hairs (there is no internationally accepted transliteration system for Arabic, so ‘nakhba’ and ‘nakba’ are both legitimate transliterations – you’d have to give the Arab letters to make your point valid).
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 11:14 am
should read
Osama Bin Laden used covert operatives to wreak violence, death and destruction specifically aimed at civilians who had no part in government or military policy in foreign countries, to try to influence public attitudes and change government policy in those countries.
Is the difference really too subtle for you?
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 11:19 am
One thing I have to admit, Obama really is outdoing himself on this election campaign. First the long form birth certificate, then ordering the assassination of Osama.
Vote:I hear next week he’ll announce he’s perfected cold fusion and stopped global cooling.
May 3rd, 2011 at 11:27 am
“One thing I have to admit, Obama really is outdoing himself on this election campaign. First the long form birth certificate, then ordering the assassination of Osama.”
I think he is going to be very hard to beat. Marco Rubio, who I have a lot of respect for and would like to see as President some day, has wisely said he will not run in 2012.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 11:28 am
NEWSFLASH:
Sir Elton John has been asked to play at the Osama Bin Laden memorial service.
He has agreed to sing his latest song – Sandals In The Bin.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 11:30 am
“I mourn the loss of thousands of precious lives, but I will not rejoice in the death of one, not even an enemy. Returning hate for hate multiplies hate, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness: only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that”
— Martin Luther King, J
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 11:30 am
Rick nails it in one at 11.14
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 11:37 am
Wow. That was a witless statement by Norman. If anything reduces the number of young green voters, that’ll do it. It’s a real insight into the green ideological mindset.
Vote:Obviously the option of trialling Bin Laden would have been put before Obama.Most people would think “a bullet to the head in cold blood beats putting those 3500 9/11 families through the mind rape of an extended international trial”, obvious security issues aside. Fail burgers to the greens for not recognising the prevailing mood of elation even over here in little ole peacenik New Zealand and for not finding another more constructive angle to spin.
May 3rd, 2011 at 11:39 am
I think you’re confusing Bryla the sorrowful Christian with Bryla the far-left anarchist. Forty years ago the Christian cloak impressed people but in these increasingly secular days it’s been worn pretty thin by the boiling hate within.
See what I mean? Chrome-steel confidence in the face on evidence to the contrary, the perfect braying donkey. You remind me of Lord Melchett in Blackadder IV: great roarer.
Luc, the laughter you hear is not the laughter you think it is
Sam
As the article itself pointed out, some are more than just typos. Moreover they’re written by a guy who has supposedly been immersed in this region for decades as he reported on it, which is why the Guardian reviewer made the rather obvious point that these blatant factual idiocies undermine the reader’s confidence.
Combine that with his “analysis” and predictions and I think it’s fair to say that Fisk bases his writing less on facts or actual thinking than his overwhelming feelings of kneejerk, Post-Modernist European guilt.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 11:46 am
Osama was a military target. He was a dangerous weapon.
Good on the USA for destroying that weapon.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 11:48 am
“It’s a real insight into the green ideological mindset.”
Yes and no.
The sad thing is that there are some aspects of green philosophy and policy I agree with.
The unfortunate problem with most Green parties, including ours, is that the good apsects get lost amongst this kind of morally bankrupt far left crap.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 11:55 am
some of the stuff from these lefties is hilarious.
luc – obama never portrayed himself as a soldier or warrior. osama did. hence, we take the piss out of the coward.
comparing a secret service agent/bodyguard doing his job to a coward using his wife as a human shield is just laughable.
then again, lefties usually are cowards.
i feel sorry for your wife/partner whatever if shes next to you and something bad goes down
“youre just like a bodyguard honey! be my shield! its the same thing!!!!”
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 11:56 am
Burial at sea is NOT a contravention of Islamic law. Fucking make an effort to actually find out you tree hugging idiots.
And yes penny I believe in the rule of law, I think flying planes into buldings and murdering 3,000 people is “illegal” and contravens international humanitarian law – couse I have actually studied these laws you poeple like to quote but don’t actually seem all that familier with so we probably wont have the same interpretation. Anyway, murder 3,000 people: Penalty, death.
Fucking head case lefties, there’s nothing they wont excuse in their war against the west.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 11:57 am
and yes Toad, it was a kill mission
they did have orders to take him alive if he was unarmed and surrendered. luckily the bitch had his mates try and fight it out while he cowered behind his wife.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 12:00 pm
“yet I’ve never seen Fisk credibly rebutted”
LOL, WUT?
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 12:02 pm
While the US is in no way perfect, and has never claimed to be so, it is worthwhile to remember that while it’s policies may have caused hundreds of thousands of deaths, it is somewhat different to the real mass murderers of recent history. Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot deliberately killed millions of their own populations in the name of political progress.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 12:10 pm
I’ve never seen fisk not get his ass ripped. Where do you think the term FISKED came from?
What is it dickhead lefty day on kiwiblog or something?
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 12:13 pm
“overwhelming feelings of kneejerk, Post-Modernist European guilt”
This is where the term Fisking originally came from. It was Andrew Sullivans post on the piece Fisk wrote about his own experience being attacked by a mob. I quote:
“Goddamit, I said and tried to bang my fist on my side until I realised it was bleeding from a big gash on the wrist – the mark of the tooth I had just knocked out of a man’s jaw, a man who was TRULY INNOCENT OF ANY CRIME except that of being the victim of the world.”
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 12:21 pm
“Moreover they’re written by a guy who has supposedly been immersed in this region for decades as he reported on it, which is why the Guardian reviewer made the rather obvious point that these blatant factual idiocies undermine the reader’s confidence.”
“Supposedly”? Are you suggesting the guy doesn’t live in Lebanon and travel frequently in other Middle East countries? That’s just silly.
“blatant factual idiocies” Except that they are not factual idiocies – they are typos and differences of opinion. And claiming ‘nakba’ can’t be transliterated as ‘nakhba’ suggests the Guardian reviewer doesn’t have a clue about the material he/she is discussing, which undermines my confidence in the critique.
BTW, how could Baghdad not have been an Ummayad city?
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 12:21 pm
The amount of talk about this being an assassination is ridiculous. This was just warfighting action. Just a battle that is all.
A battle in which an enemy general was taken out. Bin Laden was not a head of state and has also posed in the media as a soldier, has take part in combat action which is all well documented. The way I view it is that his headquarters was identified and America Soldiers were sent in to destroy him. Nothing covert, sinister or terrorist about it.
This was not an assassination.
He knew the Yanks would blow his brains out sooner or later, they made it very plain and clear what would happen.
The thousands of Bin Laden’s victims never saw it coming. Norman and his gang of hippies are an embarrassment to NZ.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 12:22 pm
We could use the theme of nation-states as terrorists to take a closer look at our “allies” in Pakistan.
After all, in light of the fact that OBL was found just 60kms from their capital, in a quiet area heavily populated by the Pakistan military and within spitting distance of one of their military academies, I’d like to think that every American, Democrat and GOP alike, are going to be asking some hard questions of their government.
My take is that any questions would simply be met with the same old lies and obfuscations – although I admit the nuclear weapon capabilities of Pakistan preclude a complete abandonment. Just dump the aid, and team up with the Indians along the lines already blazed by Bush. After all, in the age of “drones and bones” (hat tip Paul G. Buchanan) why the need to be so reliant on Afghanistan’s next door neighbour?
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 12:22 pm
Osama was unarmed. If the SEALs (I think it was SEALs?) had pointed several guns at him and said, “surrender”, instead of pointing several guns at him and shooting him, he would have had a hard time killing “several hundred” people. And, of course, refusing to comply would be justification for firing.
Executive Order 12333, issued by Ronald Reagan and still in force, says, “No person employed by or acting on behalf of the United States Government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, assassination.” I suppose you could take that to mean, “unless we’re really sure that the target is a really bad person”, but I wouldn’t, myself.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 12:25 pm
US green party watch thread. Interesting mix of Fiskers and those that realise anything but a positive spin on his death will leave them open to criticism .
http://www.greenpartywatch.org/2011/05/01/open-thread-now-that-bin-laden-is-dead-what-do-we-do-next/#comments
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 12:27 pm
As befitting the importance of the man, Elton John will be singing at Osama’s funeral. It’s understood it will be a very sombre affair and he’ll be singing Sandal in the Bin.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 12:27 pm
@Monique Watson 11:37 am
So mob rule should prevail over the rule of law, huh? I like to see evidence of wrongdoing tested in a court of law, rather than extra-judicial executions justified on the basis that we should “trust the government”.
Standing up for principles may not always be popular, but it is the right thing to do.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 12:28 pm
What is it dickhead lefty day on kiwiblog or something?
Every day is dickhead leftie day.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 12:28 pm
Apparently Osama was such a coward he hid behind a woman to save himself from being shot.
No Virgins for him at all.
Medal and big pension for the person who pulled the trigger although we will never ever know whothat was and that is how it should be.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 12:29 pm
Sam
Given that you parsed “immersed in” to “live in” I’m not surprised you want to argue about typos, translations and differences of opinion (with the Guardian reviewer, Oliver Miles, a former British ambassador to Libya, Luxembourg and Greece).
Perhaps by sheer strength of argument you’ll even be able to eliminate the term “fisking”. Best of luck with that!
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 12:30 pm
I would’ve thought that Osama had a huge amount of information that would’ve been useful to the US. Info re bank accounts, furture plans re attacks, etc. I can only conclude that the US didn’t really want that info. Interesting.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 12:33 pm
> Apparently Osama was such a coward he hid behind a woman to save himself from being shot.
They do say that behind every great man is a woman waiting to take his job…maybe she was just getting ahead of herself?
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 12:33 pm
toad
Bin Laden declared War on America, several times, even on video, he was a combatant, and was duly killed in a open action.
What do you not understand about that? He proclaimed to be a soldier and a fighter and died like one.
What court and law are you on about?
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 12:36 pm
Toad opines:
“So mob rule should prevail over the rule of law, huh?”
As has already been shown the US action was not in violation of the rule of law.
” I like to see evidence of wrongdoing tested in a court of law, rather than extra-judicial executions”
Osma bin Laden admitted that he and Al-Qaeda carried out the 911 attacks. That is proof of wrong doing.
Al-Qaeda declared war on the US and its citizens in 1998, therefore his killing was legal under war time rules and was not “extra-judicial”.
Your and your party are not standing up for principles, your standing up for terrorists, which is NEVER the right thing to do.
SHAME on your for spitting on the thousands who died at the hands of Al-Qaeda and on the victims of 911 at this time. SHAME.
You and your party of terrorist supporting scum are a stain on this country.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 12:38 pm
“Given that you parsed “immersed in” to “live in” I’m not surprised you want to argue about typos, translations and differences of opinion (with the Guardian reviewer, Oliver Miles, a former British ambassador to Libya, Luxembourg and Greece).”
Eh? Are you saying they are typos and differences of opinion now? And are you saying living in Lebanon doesn’t imply being ‘immersed’ in the region? And what does the reviewer’s job have to do with anything? Does being a British ambassador make you omniscient or something?
BTW, if Wikipedia can be trusted, Baghdad is slap bang in the middle of the Unmayed caliphate – Oliver seems to be pointing to the fact that Baghdad was extensively redeveloped by the Abbasids, hence claims that they ‘founded’ the city. Again according to Wikipedia ” a city of Baghdad is mentioned in pre-Islamic texts, including the Talmud, and the Abbasid city was likely built on the site of this earlier settlement.” So it looks like its Oliver, rather than Fisk, who hasn’t done his homework.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 12:38 pm
To Catholic Activist Bryla.
The Muslim Arabs who persecute your co religionists in the Middle East danced in the streets when innocent people were murdered in September 2001. Condemn that.
The Vatican has now twice hosted the genocidal Mugabe despite EU sanctions. Condemn that.
Elements in the Pakistan establishment have clearly hosted anit Hindu and anti Christian terrorists.Condemn that.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 12:39 pm
Your answer during the 1981 Springbok Tour was “Yes”. I even recall there was some droll piece of left-wing mockery of the opposite viewpoint at the time – “lawnorder”.
Indeed, and one can be twice as right with the patented left-wing Double Standard of Principles (now available from all leading Hope N’ Change supporters)
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 12:39 pm
@ross
Vote:Having OBL in custody would have been a nutter magnet. Endless hijackings etc
May 3rd, 2011 at 12:42 pm
“Standing up for principles may not always be popular, but it is the right thing to do.”
Ha ha ha…..good one Toad, since when have the Greens had any principles at all?
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 12:49 pm
It’s easy to believe that OBL is dead. I’m a lot more skeptical about the details.
Sounds suspiciously like propaganda.
I doubt if the fanatics will change their views much if at all.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 12:51 pm
That’s an uncommonly damming indictment of Christians from you tom. I’ll admit to getting just a little peeved at parking wardens from time-to-time… but will confess to never having felt ‘the boiling hate within’.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 12:59 pm
…
It is not legal to kill any enemy “soldier” or “combatant” regardless of circumstances.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 1:00 pm
The Greens are sending me mixed messages. Should I follow the ‘rule of law’ or not? What would THEY do?
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 1:03 pm
krazykiwi
Well I am an atheist.!!!
But it was specific to Bryla. I think he’s a far-lefter first and a Christian second (very second) and the true depth of his feelings are revealed at times like this.
Think Reverend Jeremiah Wright!
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 1:11 pm
Obama likes to watch, perhaps he really is the modern Chauncey Gardener.
“President Obama was watching on a TV screen as a commando gunned down Osama Bin Laden. Via a video camera fixed to the helmet of a U.S. Navy Seal, the leader of the free world saw the terror chief shot in the left eye.”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1382859/Osama-bin-Laden-dead-Obama-watched-Al-Qaeda-leader-die-live-video-White-House.html#ixzz1LFOguFpF
Also I don’t see how anyone can be saying this was NOT an assassination:
Vote:Assassination: 1. To murder (a prominent person) by surprise attack, as for political reasons.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/assassination
May 3rd, 2011 at 1:16 pm
Wasn’t a surprise attack. America said they will hunt him down and kill him.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 1:17 pm
The only green thing the Green Party represents is slime
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 1:18 pm
can soldiers in a war actually be assassinated?
executed maybe.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 1:20 pm
Maybe they just die on the feild of battle and should have never started the war anyway?
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 1:22 pm
@Toad and the following discussion. I’m not particularly into trusting the gummint blindly. However, I’m assuming that the green point of view on this surrounding foreign affairs and justice implications haven’t been the subject of huge amounts of Green Party research and investigation over the years by the Green party, unlike (say) environmental matters. Feel free to prove me wrong. Therefore the real issue here is that of brand abuse by the Greens to promote non core policy issues.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 1:22 pm
Does anyone know the ratio of environmental to extreme leftist press releases issued by the Greens over the last year? It must be miniscule.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 1:23 pm
Can soldiers in a war actually be executed without a trial? Isn’t the USA a signatory to the Geneva convention?
I’ve got no qualms in agreeing with Obama for ordering the assassination, but let’s not try and find euphemisms when we don’t need them.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 1:25 pm
You never see American’s report – “US soldiers were ‘assassinated’ by suicide bombers today in downtown Kandahar.” So they are hardly being hypocritical by saying that Bin Laden was killed, not assassinated. Killed in a war. Americans wasted Bin Laden, face to face, man to man, all seems fair. He could have fought back, not like he was unarmed or had his hands tied behind his back and then had his head cut off on TV in front of his family.
Just saying it was fair fight, not an assassination, just took 10 years to play out.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 1:28 pm
scrubone 10:56 am. Yes, it is. It will happen on election day. John Hatfield and the MOFOs will take some of their votes. They’ll fail to meet the threshold, and be forced to find employment in the real world. Exactly what pondscum deserve.
cheers
David Prosser
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 1:30 pm
immigant: “You never see American’s report – “US soldiers were ‘assassinated’ by suicide bombers today in downtown Kandahar.”
That’s because they’re not targeted according to their individual identity – they’re targeted as a group – US Soldiers. Assassinations are of specifically targeted individuals.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 1:34 pm
Can’t wait for the Halo epic adventure: Bin Laden. Bin Wasted
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 1:40 pm
Might keep me from fretting about the release date of Diablo 3. Oh God. I’ve just had a thought re Bin Laden. Maybe he could have been rehabilitated. What a waste. Could have stored him in a railway container over here in Godzone.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 1:43 pm
rightnow – you realise there was a 40 min fight before Osama got killed? thats a battle, not an assassination.
they knew where enemy combatants were, they engaged, they won.
its a war.
armies have been targeting high level enemies for years.
but whatever gets you through the day
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 1:46 pm
“but whatever gets you through the day” – ditto
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 1:50 pm
Bin Laden’s not targeted for his individual identity either. Targeted as a group – terrorist leaders. You logic is as flawed as mine.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 1:52 pm
“Can soldiers in a war actually be executed without a trial?”
He was not executed, he was shot in a firefight while the US tried to apprehend him. This was not in anyway an assasination or an execution. It does not in anyway violate either the Geneva Convention or the rule of law.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 1:53 pm
“Bin Laden’s not targeted for his individual identity either”
Vote:What colour is the sky on your planet?
May 3rd, 2011 at 1:56 pm
It seems like the difference between “assassinated” and just plain “killed” is the seniority of the person.
A foot soldier can be killed, but any leader must be assassinated.
That sort of elitism typical of the modern leftist.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 1:58 pm
Kimble – actually it’s just down to the definition in a dictionary, not quite as nefarious as you make out.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 2:01 pm
http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/4951535/Osama-bin-Laden-targeted-by-kill-operation
Not your average assault which may have resulted in the capture of Osama as a POW, but a Kill Operation.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 2:04 pm
RightNow
You werent the target audience for the comment.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 2:05 pm
It seems like the difference between “assassinated” and just plain “killed” is the seniority of the person.
And also the way it’s done. There seems to be quite a few assumptions being made about how this took place.
If the soldiers found him in a room armed and a risk then his death would have been a battle casualty.
If they found him unarmed and not posing an immediate risk and they shot him that would be different.
If they were under orders to shoot him regardless then it is a pre-planned targeted killing, possibly an execution and assassination.
Apart from the first scenario not good under the Geneva Convention. But then neither is rendition and torture.
Vote:Or bombing innocent people.
May 3rd, 2011 at 2:07 pm
Oh good, thanks Kimble.
For the record I’m just arguing the semantics re: assassination for the fun of it. As stated before I’ve got no qualms about Osama being killed, I just don’t think we need to find euphemisms to pretend it wasn’t an assassination. Fingers crossed Mugabe is next on someone’s list.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 2:09 pm
Exactly why the greens arent to be trusted
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 2:13 pm
Fingers crossed Mugabe is next on someone’s list.
He was on the pope’s sainthood list and was just allowed to travel through Rome to the Vatican for a major event. Bin Laden wasn’t available.
Mugabe must be nominally Catholic?
Vote:Yep:
May 3rd, 2011 at 2:18 pm
rightnow:
say im the CEO of Dime corp.
As CEO i do something really bad. like dump 50 million litres of oil into aucklands harbour.
the government comes after me.
are they coming after me because of who i am? or what i did while running dime corp?
sure, bin laden has been rightfully vilified. at the end of the day though, they were after him because of what he did while running an organisation. he did bring it on himself.
its not like they picked some random muslim to hate.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 2:24 pm
dime, nobody gets assassinated for doing nothing. What’s your point again?
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 2:24 pm
And when you kill a man you’re a murderer
Vote:Kill many and you’re a conqueror
Kill them all…ooh…oh you’re a god!
May 3rd, 2011 at 2:27 pm
Was the killing of ‘Osama Bin Laden’ – ‘vengeance’ or ‘justice’?
Is ‘vengeance’ – ‘justice’?
How can arguably extra-judicial execution and murder be considered in any sense a victory for justice, freedom or democracy?
(Given the CRAP we get in mainstream corporate media – how can we trust what we are told?
Remember?
Saddam Hussein had ‘weapons of mass destruction’………… blah blah………………… LIES…………….)
However – in order to assist more ‘informed’ debate, Kiwibloggers may like to consider the following:
“And now the killing of Osama Bin Laden, “his demise should be welcomed by all who believe in peace and human dignity” according to US President Obama – ‘Remarks by the President on Osama Bin Laden’, 2 May 2011 at
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/05/02/remarks-president-osama-bin-laden
A “resounding victory for justice, freedom, and the values shared by all democratic countries fighting shoulder to shoulder against terror” according to Israeli President Netanyahu – ‘Netanyahu tells Obama:
Bin Laden’s death shows U.S. determined to fight terror’, Ha’aretz, 2 May 2011 at http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/netanyahu-tells-obama-bin-laden-s-death-shows-u-s-determined-to-fight-terror-1.359458”
Vatican spokesman on killing of Osama bin Laden
2 May 2011
VATICAN CITY The Vatican said the killing of al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden, a man who sowed division and hatred and who caused “innumerable” deaths, should prompt serious reflection about one’s responsibility before God.
A Christian “never rejoices” in the face of a man’s death, the Vatican spokesman, Father Federico Lombardi, said in a brief statement this morning. Here is an English translation of his statement:
Osama bin Laden, as we all know, bore the most serious responsibility for spreading divisions and hatred among populations, causing the deaths of innumerable people, and manipulating religions for this purpose.
In the face of a man’s death, a Christian never rejoices, but reflects on the serious responsibilities of each person before God and before men, and hopes and works so that every event may be the occasion for the further growth of peace and not of hatred.
– http://cnsblog.wordpress.com/2011/05/02/vatican-spokesman-on-killing-of-osama-bin-laden/ ”
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
What is the considered opinion of all the ‘good Christian’ Kiwibloggers?
Penny Bright
Vote:http://waterpressure.wordpress.com
May 3rd, 2011 at 2:29 pm
Interestingly the US navy did comply with most Islamic burial requirements and they’ve buried their enemies at sea before.
The incident occurred 10 days into the battle of Okinawa. The pilot, believed to be 19-year-old Setsuo Ishino, took off with 15 other pilots from their base at Kanoya. At noon, the USS Missouri is northeast of Okinawa and air defense is sounded as the “Zeke” is spotted on radar 7,500 yards out. The Zeke loses altitude rapidly as Mighty Mo’s anti-aircraft fire hits. Miraculously, the pilot regains altitude and speeds through the gunfire, managing to strike the side of Mighty Mo. Fire erupts and debris is sent flying on deck. After the attack, the crew clears the deck of the aircraft’s remains and discovers the pilot’s body among the wreckage.
Vote:As Mighty Mo’s seamen were about to wash the enemy body overboard, Captain William M. Callaghan, Missouri’s commanding officer, orders the ship’s medical team to prepare the body for a burial at sea.
The body was draped with a Japanese flag sewn by Missouri crew and carried on deck. The crew gathered and offered a hand salute as the Marine rifles aim their weapons skyward to render a salute over the pilot’s remains. Senior Chaplain, Commander Roland Faulk, concludes the ceremony by saying, “We command his body to the deep,” and his body is dropped into the ocean.
May 3rd, 2011 at 2:30 pm
“What colour is the sky on your planet?”
he is the head of an organisation that attacked the US.
do you think al qaeda would take a shot at obama if they could? do you think its cause hes obama? or because he is the president? same shit.
if i become POTUS tomorrow, they would want me dead. would be personal, it would be the position i held.
Osama was killed for both what he did in the past and the position he held. simple.
its war.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 2:40 pm
dime>you realise there was a 40 min fight before Osama got killed?
My understanding is that the fight was over very quickly, and they then spent 40 minutes on site rounding up prisoners, taking computer equipment, photographing and filming, and looking for documents.
It is interesting to see the difference in approach between Bush and Obama. Bush tended towards imprisonment and (eventual) trial, even if this was a less than perfect process. Obama promised to close Guantanamo Bay, released that he couldn’t, but didn’t want to fill it up with more terrorists. So he has taken an aggressive line on drone attacks and other actions that result in death rather than arrest. On the whole, I think it is a better approach.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 2:46 pm
The Political heros of Wussel, Locke, Delahunty and the forefathers of Meturei all killed without compunction those who were regarded as causing ‘gangrene’ among the faithful.
Vote:This piece of shit caused the deaths of thousands who were not even in the category of “collateral damage” but merely innocents who were in the wrong place when a politically inspired political act of terror was perpetrated with those unsuspecting innocents being “used” as a significant part of the grand plan.
OBL wanted the Twin Towers destroyed with as many casualties as possible in addition to the destruction of the markers of Western Achievement.
It was a contrasting mark of respect that he was afforded the rudiments of disposal in accordance with his faith, albeit done to deny his fanatical followers a potential shrine, something completely denied to so many of his victims.
May 3rd, 2011 at 2:47 pm
Penny
Was the killing of ‘Osama Bin Laden’ – ‘vengeance’ or ‘justice’?
Did you not hear it yet? The operation was named “Vengeful Justice Hammer Strike Eagle Claw”
Him and the Yanks were at war. Yanks killed him before he could Kill more of them. Everyone keeps talking like this was some sort of underhanded dastardly plot.
As soon as he claimed responsibility for 9/11 in those 2 videos that came out days later, US openly said that they will hunt him down and/or kill him.
Why are people rallying at OBL side? He openly wanted to kill westerners and Christians what did he think US would turn the other cheek?
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 2:54 pm
(Given the CRAP we get in mainstream corporate media – how can we trust what we are told?
Remember?
Saddam Hussein had ‘weapons of mass destruction’………… blah blah………………… LIES…………….)
But he did have Weapons of Mass Destruction.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 2:56 pm
The bloody Vatican would be better advised to remove the gang of paedophiles in its midst before criticising anyone.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 2:56 pm
Immagant – don’t forget the wrong sort of Muslims – also on the hit list.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 2:59 pm
“Weapons of Mass Destruction” is that when someone smashes up the communion wafers?
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 2:59 pm
And Muslims too, my bad and Voodoo worshipers and Jews of course, who can forget the Jews. Glad that antisamite is dead.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 3:02 pm
Video from the kill scene: http://www.verumserum.com/?p=24096
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 3:05 pm
Watching Americans cheering in the streets last night, I had to wonder what they thought they were celebrating, and what they think it has changed. According to the latest leaked prisoner assessments from Guantanamo, Al Qaeda may or may not have a nuclear weapon. If they do, they will certainly try to use it. By all means let us wank on about how slick the yanks are and how sexy their use of violence is. I wonder who will be cheering when a medium-size city turns to radioactive waste?
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 3:11 pm
So it will be America’s fault that terrorist nuke innocent people? Yanks should have just bent over and took it instead?
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 3:14 pm
db if the crazies have a nuke, then they will use it, no matter if their poster boy is killed or not.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 3:26 pm
Unbelievable. You’re all missing the point here which is that the yanks have now eliminated the key witness who could have conclusively proven that 9/11 was a CIA plot sponsored by the international financier clique who control the world. Now there’s only one more mission they need to fly just to tidy up the loose ends – somewhere over Botany – so that the truth will never get out.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 3:31 pm
@dime 1:43 pm
its a war.
armies have been targeting high level enemies for years.
Accepting it is a war, it depends on the circumstances. If bin Laden were reaching for a weapon, or even if they thought he was, it is a combat kill.
If he was unarmed and posed no immediate threat it is a war crime, just as any combatant shooting someone they can readily take prisoner with no threat to themselves or their fellow combatants is.
We don’t know for certain which was the case, but I would have thought that if it were the former, the US would have told us that by now. And all the reports suggest there was never any intention to take bin Laden alive, even if it were possible as the circumstances of the assault on his compound unfolded.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 3:45 pm
The comment above is why I’ll never Vote greens, They will sell they mother upstream in an effort to appear peaceful and benign, trying to ride the moral white horse.
Have you ever had to bury friends or countrymen? Do you even know what war is?
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 3:48 pm
I’m not going to be abusive of the Vatican.
Vote:But hosting Mugabe there is a shocker.
And an insult really to the man they were all there to honour.
They need to take some time and think that one through for next time.
After all these are the guys who are supposed to be promoting moral courage. No matter how inconvenient.
And maybe bust some senior clerics down to some new job as assistant church cleaner in the backwoods somewhere.
May 3rd, 2011 at 3:55 pm
@immigant 3:45 pm
Hey, I’m as pleased as anyone here to see bin Laden out of the picture. What I am questioning is the means, not the end. And for the record, while I have never been in combat myself, my father fought in WWII, my nephew is an Air Force pilot, and I am an RSA member.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 3:59 pm
I wonder if Obama would have been more sympathetic to capture rather than kill at the start of an electoral cycle.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 3:59 pm
By toads definition of “war crime” air strikes are illegal.
So are snipers and sappers.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 4:23 pm
Oh do fuck off toad. Its not as if they were after him because his camel ran a red light or didn’t have a warrant of fitness.
And what the fuck is this “combat kill” bullshit? You seem to be inferring that there ought to be a ref and a couple of touch judges involved whenever there’s a bit of an armed stoush.
Understand this: the consequences of having him alive outweighed the consequences of having him dead. So they killed him and a couple of others. (Unless of course they only said they killed him but instead took him away for some water sports.)
So the issue is simply this: was it justifiable in ALL the circs to just kill him given the consequences of capturing him alive? Don’t think you’ll find too many supporting the negative?
And was it in the circs, a war crime? Quite possibly. Does anyone really care if it is? No. Is there any hypocrisy here? Quite possibly. Why? Well aside from the obvious reasons for offing the prick, if he was in fact unarmed and hiding behind the missus, maybe he could have been captured. Maybe they should have said: “Excuse me Mr bin Laden, kindly put your hands up and confirm that you don’t have a bomb in your trousers. Please make it snappy, we’re in a bit of a hurry.” Maybe they should have taken an experienced hostage negotiator and stayed for a couple of weeks to persuade him to walk out with no trousers. Whatever.
But if they should have and they didn’t, its hardly right up there at the My Lai/Bosnia/Serbia/Libya/Iran/Uganda
/Iraq/Cambodia/Nazi end of the scale. In fact history would suggest its within what historically at least, has become to be the acceptable range of actions having regard to post war perceptions of the Hiroshima/London/Berlin/Cologne bombings and attempted assasinations of military and political leaders in war time. And its also consistent with potting a Libyan tank when the commander is sitting on top and enjoying a date sandwich rather than being sprung shooting the locals up large in the village square. “Please dismount and step away from the tank” as the F18 whistles overhead at 350 kts? Unlikely.
But in your ivory tower rosey melon-tinted and reality devoid view of the world where all it should take is a jolly stern letter requiring that the opposition cease and desist, then yes, maybe it is hypocrisy. And if that’s not good enough for you, then feel free to leave western society, and all the privileges and benefits (warts and all) that it confers, if you find the dark side of its reality a bit much to stomach.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 4:29 pm
Have the birthers and teabaggers had a timely excuse to change focus?
One thing for sure, the body won’t be in Roswell. There’s nothing in Roswell. Except some fake moonscape.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 4:39 pm
Entirely predictable PG.
Lots of people thought bin Laden was already dead, and they now have nothng but the word of a person they dont trust as proof that he died this week.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 5:34 pm
@ thedavincimode 4:23 pm
Sorry, but in a civilised world there are some rules of military engagement, and the US has signed up to them. Just because bin Laden didn’t give a shit about them doesn’t mean other shouldn’t. If they do, they lower themselves to his level.
Do you think the Nuremberg trials following WWII should not have happened?
Should the Allies have just lined the (at that stage alleged) Nazi war criminals up against a wall and shot them, regardless of any judicial process?
For me, the Allies got it right at Nuremberg. I’m not that confident the US has got it right with bin Laden.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 5:50 pm
Greens continue to make satire redundant
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 5:56 pm
@ Put it away 5:50 pm
Can’t argue the issue because the facts as we know them don’t support you, so (badly, in this case) attempt to ridicule those arguing on the side you want to go away!
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 5:59 pm
Watch the video Toad and then preach to us.
http://www.realogrish.com/beheading-videos/2516-very-graphic-23-beheading-videos-part.html
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 6:07 pm
“Can’t argue the issue because the facts as we know them don’t support you, so (badly, in this case) attempt to ridicule those arguing on the side you want to go away!”
Ummm, no toad, I’m explicitly not attempting to ridicule the greens, because their real actions are better satire than anything I could come up with. It’s a statement not a joke. That is the entire point. Sorry you didn’t understand it
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 6:15 pm
Toad’s position as an apologist for terrorists is contemptible and well suited to a card-carrying member of the communist Green Party.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 6:16 pm
“Call me old fashioned”
That’s not what I’d call you, Norman.
Ignorant little ginger pipsqueak is what I’d call you.
Oh, and for future reference, the US didn’t “assassinate” bin Laden, it mounted a raid to capture him which he resisted. He was killed in the subsequent firefight.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 6:17 pm
“Sorry, but in a civilised world there are some rules of military engagement, and the US has signed up to them. Just because bin Laden didn’t give a shit about them doesn’t mean other shouldn’t. If they do, they lower themselves to his level.”
What complete and utter bullshit, does Toad really think there should be two sets of rules on the battlefield?, one for the Taleban and one for the western world?
Or is it really more of a case of Toad being highly pissed off because the Yanks succeeded in getting rid of Obama, would Toad and the Greens have been happier had the mission failed?..would the Greens and Toad prefer to have the bodies of the dead American soldiers displayed by the Taleban, perhaps we could have chucked in a beheading or two to really please the watermelons.
There is only one rule on the battlefield…..win.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 6:21 pm
Big Bruv – ffs, toad is not a champion of the Al Qaeda cause, don’t ruin the thread going there.
Toad – Bin Laden had enough of an organisation and firepower around him to qualify as a military target. IMHO. War is never ideal, and nor were the Nuremberg trials. From the wiki article:
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 6:27 pm
RRM
Toad and the Greens have always been a champion of any cause that is anti American, pointing out that fact is not going to ruin this or any other thread.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 6:33 pm
Not one green has condemned Al Qaeda for the environmental damage done by their actions in flying into the World Trade Centre, all too busy making in New Yorks fault for getting up and going to work.
But seriously a couple of the apologists here need to take a good look at themselves. Even people who I know don’t agree with me on most things and vice a versa most of the time have the intelligence to see sense in this result.
One or two here are absolutely sickening, especially the lantern maker from Queensland, disgusting especially comments made last night
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 7:00 pm
If I had to choose the “high ground” to occupy in a war, I dont think “moral” would be at the top of the list.
Countries signed the Geneva Convention for the sake of their own soldiers.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 7:38 pm
One thing I have always prided myself on is the ability to make my own reasoned judgements about any and all issues that are presented in the media, regardless of any political bias. There have been numerous decisions made by the right wing that I have taken issue with, and many decisions that left wing have made that have met with my approval. Although my political outlook is largely categorised as right wing, I have seen too many instances in history where intolerance and absolutism have led to nothing but pain and suffering.
This is why the constant anti american myopia of Russel Norman, Penny Bright, and their ilk should be treated as the bigotry that it is.
Bin Laden chose his manner of living, and dying. That is more of a choice that the passengers in four planes had one September about 10 years ago!
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 7:57 pm
As toad noted this is a war, albeit one against a supra-national group rather than a state. Both al-Qaeda and the US ‘declared’ war on each other. If OBL was leader or senior military figure of a country at war with the US or any other country then the attack would be justified not as an assassination but as a legitimate strike against the enemy command and control authority (like the strike to get Saddam at the start of Gulf War II).
Some people have mentioned President Reagan’s executive order 12,333 prohibiting assassinations. While that is still valid, it was probably not meant to apply to a war situation (there is little commentary on the exact meaning of this part of the Executive Order, which is only part of a bigger one on national intelligence matters). Things like the Geneva and Hague conventions are meant to apply. Of course, neither of those have been updated to apply to situations where the ‘enemy’ is not another nation (or signatory to the Act)
This situation is like the attacks on Admiral Yamamoto or Erwin Rommel. Both of these generals were specifically targeted by the enemy (the former succeeded, the latter failed). The attack on Reinhard Heydrich by Czech partisans (at a time he held political and military positions) is another example. I can think of few people who would have said that specifically targeting people like Heydrich was not justified at the time.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 8:08 pm
Who was Osama? An alternative narrative.
Bin Laden was trained by the Pakistani Inter Services Intelligence as a member/associate of the Mujahideen (an anti-soviet, militant islamic group), during the late 1970s. From this time, through to the mid 1980s he was an operative in Pakistan’s CIA-sponsored war in the Soviet client state of Afghanistan (US records indicate that they spent nearly $3 billion dollars over that time to train and equip the Afghan rebels.).
During this time Osama inherited thirty million dollars from his father’s construction business, meaning he was also in a position to lend personal financial help to the struggling Afghani and Pakistani freedom fighters. He formed quick alliances among the half dozen or so major factions of the Mujahedeen (based in Pakistan) led by Afghani Sheik Hekmatyar. This is where Osama’s life of terrorism begins. Fighting on the same side as the US.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO109C.html
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/08_01_98_osama_bin_laden.html
In the early 1990s bin-Laden took up sanctuary in the Sudan and was afforded a kind of safe haven. He threw himself into massive construction projects including road building. The Sudanese government has admitted that it had an agreement with the U.S. But the US pulled the plug on the deal, forcing the Sudanese government to expel him in 1995. This drove him into the arms of the increasingly hostile Taliban militia in Afghanistan – the same
Mujahideen leaders he had previously allied with. From Afganistan, Bin Laden continued to work with the ISI, which was, at the CIA’s behest (the CIA expect something in return for the billions in funding), coordinating Islamic resistance in the Balkan and central Asia muslim–populated states.
“With regard to Chechnya, the main rebel leaders Shamil Basayev and Al Khattab were trained and indoctrinated in CIA sponsored camps in Afghanistan and Pakistan In this regard, the involvement of Pakistan’s ISI and its radical Islamic proxies are actually calling the shots in this war.”
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/09_18_01_bushbin.html
For the CIA, this served the purpose of destablising the said states, making them vulnerable to US influence (this is known as a “strategy of tension” – and aims to create circumstances where armed client-groups emerge and can be manipulated with offers of funding and armoury. You pick the winner you want).
It is no secret, that the US military and political establishment see the Middle Eastern and Central Asian states as constituting the primary global geo-political bridgehead of the next few decades. So this hypothesis meshes with geo-political reality.
The Taliban worked closely with Pakistan’s ISI in their efforts to destabilise the “stan” states. This allowed Bin Laden to divert resources from Afghanistan, to commit terrorist acts against US targets in the Middle East. This, in secret, was probably known by the ISI, but it would have served the purpose of their CIA pay masters – enabling them to rationalise the escalation US military presence in the Middle East. It wasn’t enough, and that’s where 9/11 comes in. Whether or not Bin Laden was materially involved or was just a scape-goat is not known. We do however know that the Pakistani ISI funded the lead 9/11 hijacker – and we also know that the ISI is, in large part, funded by the CIA. Follow the money and you will have your truth.
Conveniently ignored in all of the press coverage since the tragic events of Sept. 11 is the fact that on May 17 2001 Secretary of State Colin Powell announced a gift of $43 million to the Taliban as a purported reward for its eradication of Afghanistan’s opium crop. That, in effect seems to have been a kiss of death, because:
“until February 2001, Afghanistan had been the world’s largest producer of opium/heroin, claiming close to 70% of the world’s total production. That opium, consumed largely in Western Europe and smuggled through the Balkans (primarily by CIA), was a huge source of liquidity for Western financial institutions and markets. Indeed, prior to the WTC attacks, credible sources, including the U.S. government, the IMF, Le Monde and the U.S. Senate placed the amount of drug cash flowing into Wall Street and U.S. banks at around $250-$300 billion a year. Much of this was derrived from the Afganistan opium trade. Liquidity is like the lubrication in the economic engine – it allows investment in productive areas of the economy to occur. Without it, the economy slows.
So with the destruction of the opium crop, the Teliban had made themselves and Osama expendible to US interests. Of course today Afganistan is once again the world’s major producer of opium and it’s plain-sailing for the CIA and its wall-street client banks and companies.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 8:35 pm
you missed out the bit where osama didnt get enough hugs as a boy. all because the bank of america said so.
poor lil osama.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 8:46 pm
So, assuming it is a war, and if the situation were reversed, and bin Laden’s forces had assassinated President Obama, would that be okay by you guys too?
Or do the rules of engagement change, depending on which side you are on?
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 8:56 pm
toad,
If I understand you, the fact that Hitler was not actually convicted of any crimes against humanity or war crimes means it was utterly wrong for the US army to have tried to kill him.
“Or do the rules of engagement change, depending on which side you are on?”
No, they change depending on what’s right and what’s wrong.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:00 pm
Russel Norman and frogboy and the rest are just worried about the Mana Party chipping into their anti-Western neo-Leninist base. If Sue Bradford jumps on board officially it might drag their vote down below the 5% threshold. And what better way to hold onto it than to reiterate their commitment to the destruction of capitalism and Western liberal democracy?
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:10 pm
1. You’re comparing apples with lumps of shit, toad. In the universe I am living in POTUS did not drive airplanes into the sides of buildings or commit similarly horrific acts and therefore the reverse situation could not have happened.
2. The rules do change at that stage of the game. The result of the impact of planes against skyscrapers is that things move beyond shaking hands and swapping sides. A bullet in the head is worth more than a terrorist in custody.
And absolutely the rules change depending on what side I am on. otherwise there would not exist such concepts as good and evil. And I will also choose to be on the side that is more evolutionary favorable to myself and my offspring. That’s human nature.
We don’t live in a civilised world last time I looked. I think your problem may be that you have more faith in the human race than it deserves.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:25 pm
For moral clarity, let’s not limit this to Russell’s mate bin Laden, who the Yanks tried to capture yesterday, rather that “assassinate” as Russell seems to believe. How about al-Zarqawi – a mass murderer who has been described as making bin Laden look sane; killed when the US dropped a bomb down his chimney.
That was a genuine attempt to kill rather than capture. Yet Russell and toad here tell us that this was actually a crime by the US.
This is the same Russell who craves power over the rest of us.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:26 pm
I think your problem may be that you have more faith in the human race than it deserves.
Or perhaps you have less, Monique.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:30 pm
3 words – Bull-fucking-shit
Vote:Nobody on the far left truly believes that
May 3rd, 2011 at 9:43 pm
So tell me -
Vote:Other than the self indulgent auto-gratification to the American (such an Appropria”Na”tive expression) psyche why should the alleged contemporary
demise of Mr OBL dominate global news?
The “Idea” prevails – no leader required.
Sad that OBL will not see the realisation of his Quest (some call it Jihad) for change in the Arabian Peninsula complete – but so imminent.
May 3rd, 2011 at 9:46 pm
yawn
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:47 pm
“3 words – Bull-fucking-shit Nobody on the far left truly believes that”
Where is the far left though? I don’t know of many lefties who believe in or advocate communism these days. Osama’s death will only inspire more martyrs. He was just a face to direct the ridiculous “war on terror” – which is all just a game of smoke and mirrors designed to enable the US to achieve its geo-strategic “imperatives”. People who think it is all a Steven Segal movie where the good guys are motivated solely out of a sense of moral indignation to get the bad guys – please – try joining the real world.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:51 pm
the US are imperialists, aren’t they mb.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:55 pm
Osama’s death will only inspire more martyrs. He was just a face to direct the ridiculous “war on terror” – which is all just a game of smoke and mirrors designed to enable the US to achieve its geo-strategic “imperatives”.
So you’re a 9/11 truther. ‘Nuf said.
Oh, and look up the “fairness doctrine”.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 9:56 pm
Yep MB – The best favour for a Martyr is to facilitate the Destiny
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:01 pm
Sad that OBL will not see the realisation of his Quest (some call it Jihad) for change in the Arabian Peninsula complete – but so imminent.
valer, al-Qa’ida is irrelevant in the ME. The Arab Spring sees the Arab street demanding not the caliphate but democracy and “freedom” – i.e. the complete abrogation of everything that al-Qa’ida proclaims to stand for. Too bad this obvious fact hasn’t yet penetrated some thick skulls who still insist that Muslims want to impose Sharia Law on the West, but never mind, I’ve noticed most of those people aren’t too quick on the uptake.
So no, not imminent at all, really. From the evidence.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:02 pm
wat – so is Russia, so is China. All vai for access to the energy reserves of the middle east and central Asia. This area also hold historical geo-strategic importance, as those who control it, can control land-based trade between the European, Asian and African continents.
To be honest – i’d rather the US have the most influence in the area than say China or Russia (they are less democratic than the US). So i’m not necessarily against what the US’s primary aims are. I just get so sick of the Orwellian bullshit that people are supposed to buy in the area of international relations it’s not good for democracy. That is the aspect of it all the scares me the most. Not the dope running, or the terrorist attacks that the US fund through the ISI.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:04 pm
It’s interesting how people equate the left with 911 “truth.” When was the last time you heard Liarbore talking about that? Or is it just the far left? Sigh. When you’ve only got a hammer, everything looks like a nail, doesn’t it. Try to get out a bit more people, you might understand “truth” doesn’t lie only along the political spectra.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:17 pm
I’d rather the US have the most influence in the area than say China or Russia (they are less democratic than the US)
Crikey mb, you surprise me.
You haven’t noticed that the US/UK’s modus operandi is to install their rulers of choice where they need to, whereas the Chinese don’t seek to do that. China is pretty indifferent to the domestic politics, they use other means to get what they want.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:22 pm
Hey Reid (may you have done much)
Vote:I respect your assertions – but – have not read yet that the current fervour for change in the “Arab Spring” (say UAE/Bahrain) is “complete abrogation of everything that al-Qa’ida” – indeed the demands for “Removal of US presence from the Arabian Peninsular” have a resonance.
Demands for Democracy are a Facebook thing – easily replicated but rarely validated .
May 3rd, 2011 at 10:27 pm
You don’t listen to Al-jazeera much I take it valer.
They have reasonable coverage of what the Arab Street is saying and doing, and don’t forget, Egypt, Syria, Libya are in the Arab Spring as well and what are they saying. Try not to get sucked in by the opinion of some who seem to think that Fox News really is “fair and balanced” whereas Al-jazeera is simply an al-Qa’ida mouthpiece. Truth is rarely that simple.
I wasn’t BTW particularly referring to anti-US sentiment, I was referring specifically to the distinction between what al-Qa’ida advocates in terms of Sharia Law, and what the Arab Street are saying they want in terms of a domestic governance model. That actually has very little to do with whether or not a particular country wants a US presence in their homeland.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:32 pm
What do you mean ‘we’ white man?
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:36 pm
the US do destabalise regions and potential threats. good for them. id still rather have them as the main super power. imagine if the USSR had won the cold war. or china was top dog. fuck that.
and yeah, better not to arrest osama (it would lead to a trial and course all sorts of grief) and ya cant kill him cause he becomes a martyr. they shoulda left him alone. idiots.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:37 pm
Reid – yes, the Chinese are even worse cultural chauvinists than the yanks. I don’t particularly like the means that the CIA use to achieve its objectives, which it no doubt sees as, in the interest of the west. Sadly however, the CIA/US is the lesser evil. If they leave the area alone completely, someone else will fill the the power vacuum straight away, because we’re talking about a bunch of relatively small and weak states, with a lot of mineral wealth. Because of this reality, the modern lefty realist finds himself in somewhat of a pickle.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:38 pm
Normally I’m against funding expensive trips for politicians, but I really think Russell Norman can make a difference to the world.
I propose that rather than having meetings in the US, we send Russell over to Afghanistan to negotiate with Al Qaeda face-to-face. Let’s set him loose around the training camps in Pakistan, and teach our fundamentalist friends the wonders of a peaceful green society.
We could offer Russell the accompaniment of our SAS for his protection, but would understand that as a pacifist he would refuse this. I’m sure he’d even decline having a weapon of his own for protection – as everything can be achieved by non-violent means. Maybe he’ll chain himself to the Taliban rocket launcher cupboard, maybe he’ll picket with placards and chants like “No nukes in dirty bombs!”
The only realistic outcome from Russ’s intervention would be world peace. Let’s hope he gets over there soon – and if they do capture him and threaten to cut off his head, I’m sure that he’ll be proud of our resolve not to intervene.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:38 pm
Toad, from a quasi-’legal’ perspective I think that the President would be a legitimate target for bin Laden’s forces in time of war (as part of their enemy’s high command). Whether they could get to him as easily as the US got to OBL once they knew where he was is another matter…
However, from a personal viewpoint I consider one attack to be ‘better’ than the other, much in the same way as (had I been alive) I would have rejoiced if the US killed a certain Austrian painter and mourned if Nazi Germany had blown up FDR. That’s more a question of moral equivalence than one about legitimacy.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:44 pm
What I recall of the al-Qa’ida requests around 2001.. (paraphrased)
1/ An end to sanctions against Iraq – (Done – and who could dispute the Paucity)
2/ A removal of US bases in the Arabian Peninsular (In progress – A’int that what they’re demanding now?)
3/ A cessation of US hostilities in Somalia (Well I saw the BHD movie , seems a bit quiet after that)
4/ An end to the use of US veto in UN forums that are critical of Israel (well Rahm has resigned – lets see Murray)
Whats all this Sharia stuff Reid?
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:46 pm
Mission accomplished OBL ?? (imminently)
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:53 pm
Reid – yes, the Chinese are even worse cultural chauvinists than the yanks.
Er, I was saying they weren’t, mb, and look around, they haven’t tried to depose anyone in the South Pacific or SE Asia, have they. Yes, they deal with regimes like the Junta in Burma, but they don’t try to depose them. Whereas the US/UK would try to and have done so many times and are doing so right now, in the ME. So which approach is the more imperial?
Whats all this Sharia stuff Reid?
I can’t recall their demands back then valer and can’t be bothered looking it up, but (a) just cause a terrorist organisation makes a demand doesn’t mean they will stick to it and this is what they really want and (b) are you seriously suggesting that al-Qa’ida weren’t a hard-line fundamentalist Islamist organisation.
(Retiring now, will reply tomorrow)
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 10:59 pm
Rather than address Mr. Norman’s ignorance of what “terrorism” is as a tactic in unconventional warfare (“the deliberate lethal targeting of innocents so as to sow fear and panic in order to bend a subject audience to one’s will” might suffice for starters), let me explain the concept of “outlaw.” Since I lived in the US West for a time, the concept is quite known to me and applicable to Mr. bin-Laden. An “outlaw” is someone who has violated societal norms to the point that are placed “outside” of the law–that is, the person has forfeited the right to legal protection. This leaves them at the mercy of any countervailing force and completely self-reliant in terms of their physical security and defense. They are, in other words, fair game. I am not fan of wikipedia but its description of “outlaw” is succinct on the matter: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outlaw
By any definition Mr. bin-Laden was an outlaw.
I shall also leave aside the responsibility to protect, lesser evil and preventive war justifications for the raid on Mr. bin-Laden’s hideout, but let’s just say that Mr. Norman displays an appalling lack of understanding of jus in bello as well as a remarkable lack of political nous when in comes to this subject.
Sometimes the use of lethal force is justified, pure and simple. If they are to be credible on such matters (and a potential partner in any government), the Greens need to stop playing to the airey-fairey idealism of some of their supporters and deal pragmatically with a world in which matters of good and evil are not always black and white.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 11:02 pm
These “Greens” make me sick.
What a load of waffle about trials and law. When Hamas executes their own people in cold blood for undefined “crimes” we never hear any word from them. Nor Iran, nor Syria, nor anyone else, except America and the West.
They are so blatantly biased towards violent terrorists while trying to maintain a “holier than thou” attitude, it is just sick.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 11:07 pm
“Where is the far left though? I don’t know of many lefties who believe in or advocate communism these days”
At least not openly, mb. To take one example, Klaus Bosselmann of the University of Auckland does not identify as a communist as far as I know, but he used to teach in the Free University of West Germany before he came to New Zealand in 1988 just before the fall of the Berlin Wall (funny that.) He was renowned for his rabidly pro-environmental stances and was arrested trying to prevent the Americans from moving nuclear missiles into West Germany in the 70s. He was then instrumental to the foundation of the Green Party in the 90s. Makes you think..
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 11:08 pm
and..
5/ Overthrow of the pro-western despotic Regimes of Saudi Arabia and the UAE
Saudi Arabia appears the hard nut.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 11:15 pm
aredhel777
free means Frei – as in post 1948 – and evidentially post Soviet
http://www.fu-berlin.de/en/
methinks you confuxsed -
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 11:18 pm
I’m aware, Valerius. There were still loads of lefty lecturers there though. Wouldn’t be surprised if he passed information to the Stasi really.
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 11:47 pm
Bosselmann does not deceive – his students engage and learn and respect what they see and hear. (101-110, aus Erfahrung)
Vote:May 3rd, 2011 at 11:59 pm
Tristanb – Would be interesting to watch – “Give me my flag back”.
Vote:May 4th, 2011 at 1:01 am
He’s been declared dead, his body is said to have been disposed of, so therefore he will not be standing trial.
Thus there is no threat of al Qaeda taking hostages while he is being questioned … – given the optimum outcome is this …
Vote:May 4th, 2011 at 1:12 am
Paul, who determines who is an outlaw? Can the leader of a government or government – such as the Taleban be declared such (the UN did not recognised them prior to 9/11, so the regime was able to be deposed without any legal “problems”).
The UN noted that Iraq had failed to abide by cease-fire terms in 2003 and warned them of serious consequences over this but without actually authorising the use of force to overthrow the regime.
The mandate in Libya is a no fly zone to protect civilians but this now involves missile attacks on places where Gadaffii might live and there might be (“a bunker”) a communications centre.
If a non government groups declares a government leadership or imperial force in support of local dictatorships an outlaw – such as those in the USA in the war of independence – is this legitimised only in victory?
Vote:May 4th, 2011 at 7:38 am
toad
“Sorry, but in a civilised world there are some rules of military engagement”
toad, I must have missed the bit about military engagement being “civilised”. What is “civilised” about killing other people? And why, if I happen to be just sitting quietly, picking my nose and minding my own business when someone decides to launch an unprovoked attack and invade my country, do I need to observe your “rules of military engagement”. Can you tell me what was “civilised” about bombing Hiroshima? The fire storms created in Cologne? Let me answer that for you. Nothing. Should the allies have done it? Yes.
toad, all you are doing is drawing your line in the sand between what is acceptable and what isn’t. Fair enough. You and I would each re-draw that line differently according to the circumstances. But killing people isn’t civilised.
We send our young guys and girls overseas asking them to be prepared to kill and be killed. We would like to think that the reasons we ask them to do this are good and in this sense civilised. But although the objectives might be civilised, the means that we knowingly ask them to use are not. If those had been our people that had gone in to ventilate Mr bin Laden’s noodle, I would NOT be asking them to explain why they didn’t take the rule book with them and compromise their safety and their mission by taking him prisoner. That is my line in the sand on this one. And I would be thanking them for carrying out this uncivilised act that I could not. That’s me being honest with myself. On the other hand, I don’t think you are being honest with yourself. I think that you are struggling with the conflict inherent in asking other people to go to war and willingly put their lives at risk.
If bin Laden had been sitting on a park bench in downtown Washington, then it might have been naughty to just plug him. He wasn’t.
Vote:May 4th, 2011 at 7:52 am
Let’s forget about oil for a moment and think about past U.S. actions.
Saddam Hussein was arrested by the U.S. forces. He was accused, tried, found guilty and punished. Finally he was buried in his home town.
Bin Laden was treated like shit.
10 years of planning?
Crack troops?
One law for all?
Yea right.
Vote:May 4th, 2011 at 9:32 am
There is an irony that American forces felt more secure arresting the former ruler of Iraq while occupying the country in the face of local resistance than in Pakistan, supposedly an ally. But they had little military force on the ground and their ally was hosting many terrorists and sympathisers and even the ultimnate loyalty of the Pakistan security elite was as tenuous as that as a prison guard in Kandahar.
Vote:May 4th, 2011 at 9:39 am
The savage got what he deserved.
Vote:May 4th, 2011 at 10:42 am
Saddam was found hiding down a hole in an area under US military control fuckwit.
Vote:May 4th, 2011 at 12:45 pm
Toad said:
“Should the Allies have just lined the (at that stage alleged) Nazi war criminals up against a wall and shot them, regardless of any judicial process?”
They did, and lots of them too, knowing that they were so far down the “Food chain” they were never likely to get to court and be held responsible for their actions in a post-war Europe that was anxious to put the events behind them. These summary executions went on well into the 50′s.
Vote: