U.S. has intel that Osama bin Laden's son and heir Hamza is dead, say officials

originally posted by: Gargoyle91
I'm still not convinced that Osama bin Laden is dead quite convenient he was thrown off a boat .

Why.

Is it harder to get some lookalike and make them dead and parade their facade around? Or the truth, to swallow?

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: Sillyolme

Isnt outright assassination against like everybody's laws?

Depends who done it.

America under Obama assassinated a 16 year old kid from Denver without any kind of judicial oversight. Even though Executive order. 123333 under Nixon said that nobody acting for the American government would carry out assassination Obama held weekly meetings where they would review what was essentially a kill list of targets deemed to be "terrorists" who would then be killed without ever having faced trail. One of these was a kid from Denver.

Make no mistake though, while Obama might have been doing this Trump is also doing it, he has just changed the rules so that the American's don't even bother publishing how many they have killed now. Its more secret than it was under Obama.

Could they just kill him and say yeah we did it so what?

That is exactly what has been happening with Drone strikes pretty much since the day Bush asked if they could equip a drone with a missile.

You have to make it about Trump don't you? I was actually glad to read a thread from Silly that wasn't political. It was good reading until you chimed in.

originally posted by: LogicalGraphitti

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: Sillyolme

Isnt outright assassination against like everybody's laws?

Depends who done it.

America under Obama assassinated a 16 year old kid from Denver without any kind of judicial oversight. Even though Executive order. 123333 under Nixon said that nobody acting for the American government would carry out assassination Obama held weekly meetings where they would review what was essentially a kill list of targets deemed to be "terrorists" who would then be killed without ever having faced trail. One of these was a kid from Denver.

Make no mistake though, while Obama might have been doing this Trump is also doing it, he has just changed the rules so that the American's don't even bother publishing how many they have killed now. Its more secret than it was under Obama.

Could they just kill him and say yeah we did it so what?

That is exactly what has been happening with Drone strikes pretty much since the day Bush asked if they could equip a drone with a missile.

You have to make it about Trump don't you? I was actually glad to read a thread from Silly that wasn't political. It was good reading until you chimed in.

...Also some pretty strong criticism there about Obama buddy just also pointing out the fact that Trumps still doing it he has just made it more secretive, its not for any political reason rather just answering the question about the legality of it. It went on under Obama, its still going on under Trump am not making it "about trump"

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Isnt outright assassination against like everybody's laws?
Could they just kill him and say yeah we did it so what?

The media misuses the word "assassination." International laws regarding assassination essentially say it is against international law for a country to intentionally target the leader of another nation outside of the confines of active warfare between the two countries. Hamza (ironic to live a life forbidden to eat the delicious gift of pork yet have "Ham" in your name) bin Laden was not a country's leader and the US, NATO, and most Western allied global organizations have actively declared war on Al Qaida and most other Islamofascist terrorist cartels.

You have to make it about Trump don't you?

Pray tell who else would have authorized it?

a reply to: burdman30ott6

bin Laden was not a country's leader and the US, NATO, and most Western allied global organizations have actively declared war on Al Qaida and most other Islamofascist terrorist cartels.

This was basically the same logic that Chaney and co used to give a legal defence to torture (sorry enhanced interrogation) or at least it was part of the legal justification. Its actually quite a interesting exercise in how you can manipulate international law once you get over the brutality of it all.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: burdman30ott6

bin Laden was not a country's leader and the US, NATO, and most Western allied global organizations have actively declared war on Al Qaida and most other Islamofascist terrorist cartels.

This was basically the same logic that Chaney and co used to give a legal defence to torture (sorry enhanced interrogation) or at least it was part of the legal justification. Its actually quite a interesting exercise in how you can manipulate international law once you get over the brutality of it all.

A move I 100% agree with and think should be used more often than it previously has been, for what it's worth. We're dealing with animals that cut off their living captive's heads while dancing and singing... but a little Chinese water torture is too extreme and inhumane? GTFO

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: LogicalGraphitti

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: Sillyolme

Isnt outright assassination against like everybody's laws?

Depends who done it.

America under Obama assassinated a 16 year old kid from Denver without any kind of judicial oversight. Even though Executive order. 123333 under Nixon said that nobody acting for the American government would carry out assassination Obama held weekly meetings where they would review what was essentially a kill list of targets deemed to be "terrorists" who would then be killed without ever having faced trail. One of these was a kid from Denver.

Make no mistake though, while Obama might have been doing this Trump is also doing it, he has just changed the rules so that the American's don't even bother publishing how many they have killed now. Its more secret than it was under Obama.

Could they just kill him and say yeah we did it so what?

That is exactly what has been happening with Drone strikes pretty much since the day Bush asked if they could equip a drone with a missile.

You have to make it about Trump don't you? I was actually glad to read a thread from Silly that wasn't political. It was good reading until you chimed in.

...Also some pretty strong criticism there about Obama buddy just also pointing out the fact that Trumps still doing it he has just made it more secretive, its not for any political reason rather just answering the question about the legality of it. It went on under Obama, its still going on under Trump am not making it "about trump"

How do you know Trump is doing it? If it's secretive, how is that that you know? Getting briefings the rest of us don't, I guess.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Am not saying if I agreed with it or not am just highlighting that it was part of the justification that they used.

It was more than a little waterboarding though....

originally posted by: LogicalGraphitti

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: LogicalGraphitti

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: Sillyolme

Isnt outright assassination against like everybody's laws?

Depends who done it.

America under Obama assassinated a 16 year old kid from Denver without any kind of judicial oversight. Even though Executive order. 123333 under Nixon said that nobody acting for the American government would carry out assassination Obama held weekly meetings where they would review what was essentially a kill list of targets deemed to be "terrorists" who would then be killed without ever having faced trail. One of these was a kid from Denver.

Make no mistake though, while Obama might have been doing this Trump is also doing it, he has just changed the rules so that the American's don't even bother publishing how many they have killed now. Its more secret than it was under Obama.

Could they just kill him and say yeah we did it so what?

That is exactly what has been happening with Drone strikes pretty much since the day Bush asked if they could equip a drone with a missile.

You have to make it about Trump don't you? I was actually glad to read a thread from Silly that wasn't political. It was good reading until you chimed in.

...Also some pretty strong criticism there about Obama buddy just also pointing out the fact that Trumps still doing it he has just made it more secretive, its not for any political reason rather just answering the question about the legality of it. It went on under Obama, its still going on under Trump am not making it "about trump"

How do you know Trump is doing it? If it's secretive, how is that that you know? Getting briefings the rest of us don't, I guess.

Well its happened under Trump, he was hitting Yemen with one strike a day for his first 100 days. Although they don't come out and confirm how many have been killed anymore the strikes still happen and can still be reported on. If you think Trump isn't continuing to authorise American Drone strikes then I don't know what to tell you.

It's happening.

This is a really good example of something else, I am bashing Trump for this just as much as Obama but with those politically tinted spectacles you have on you only seem to be bothered about me mentioning Trump. So your willing to have me bash Obama for it but not Trump.

hmmmmm....

a reply to: Sillyolme

That's unfortunate.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Am not saying if I agreed with it or not am just highlighting that it was part of the justification that they used.

It was more than a little waterboarding though....

My point was that I don't think we owed anyone justification for the methods used to counter Islamofascism following 911. The existence of our enemy and that enemy's embracing the Devil was all the justification needed.

originally posted by: Gargoyle91
I'm still not convinced that Osama bin Laden is dead quite convenient he was thrown off a boat .

I thought he was shot in the head. Never heard about him being tossed off a boat or whatever.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

I don't know if I entirely agree with you on that, I have got some pretty complex views about this stuff in so much that I can agree that at the time America was facing an enemy that didn't quite conform to any rule book which meant that a unique approach was required. Don't think I really want to derail this though getting into my issues with how American and her allies went about fighting the war on terror.

The Bin Laden family is enormous, numbering in the hundreds. Osama was just one of them. There are numerous other family lines within the Bin Laden family.

FWIW.

originally posted by: LogicalGraphitti

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: Sillyolme

Isnt outright assassination against like everybody's laws?

Depends who done it.

America under Obama assassinated a 16 year old kid from Denver without any kind of judicial oversight. Even though Executive order. 123333 under Nixon said that nobody acting for the American government would carry out assassination Obama held weekly meetings where they would review what was essentially a kill list of targets deemed to be "terrorists" who would then be killed without ever having faced trail. One of these was a kid from Denver.

Make no mistake though, while Obama might have been doing this Trump is also doing it, he has just changed the rules so that the American's don't even bother publishing how many they have killed now. Its more secret than it was under Obama.

Could they just kill him and say yeah we did it so what?

That is exactly what has been happening with Drone strikes pretty much since the day Bush asked if they could equip a drone with a missile.

You have to make it about Trump don't you? I was actually glad to read a thread from Silly that wasn't political. It was good reading until you chimed in.

You can't be serious. Who TF else would be rubber stamping the go-ahead for something that sensitive? Santa Claus?

Like it or not, if you're going to examine and critique one president's methods, you have to consider all of them, including the one(s) you support. Especially if they're making a more concerted effort than previous administrations to keep it on the down-low. Doing otherwise shows willingness to turn blind eyes when s# gets back alley sketchy legally.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: burdman30ott6

I don't know if I entirely agree with you on that, I have got some pretty complex views about this stuff in so much that I can agree that at the time America was facing an enemy that didn't quite conform to any rule book which meant that a unique approach was required. Don't think I really want to derail this though getting into my issues with how American and her allies went about fighting the war on terror.

* Though I will not moderate a thread I'm participating as a member in, I will say as a Mod that holistic topic evolution is OK and what we're discussing is not off topic to any discussion of a bin Laden. *

I understand, though I suspect you and I are on totally different pages on this issue, I agree that this country did not fight that war the way it should have been fought. While I absolutely reject the idea that 911 was an inside attack or in any way planned or expected by the Administration, I am very open to the theory that the administration ultimately used the attack as a way to kickback money making opportunities to the Military Industrial Complex's private partners. We didn't fight in Iraq and Afghanistan to win it, we fought to stretch it out and open footholds for groups like Blackwater to enter the picture and get paid handsomely for the duration of their proposed contracts. "Winning native hearts," "liberating," and "kinder, gentler" were flailing excuses that sounded honorable to enough Americans to keep the country from not demanding to know why we didn't utilize our full capacity and grease spot both countries within the first week of dropping bombs.

So what was the story this time? Was there a week long fire fight while him and his elite, heavily armoured stormtroops defended their triple-steel layered, anti-missile, anti-nuke, terrorist bunker (complete with kitchen and dining rooms)?



I think in actual reality, he was probably offed cowardly, not for allegedly being a terrorist, but probably more so, because what he knew about what the CIA were up to

I'm guessing there's no pictures/evidence and he was tossed into the ocean out of respect to his religion???

originally posted by: Gargoyle91
I'm still not convinced that Osama bin Laden is dead quite convenient he was thrown off a boat .

Right?
More likely brought home to retire on his CIA pension.