• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Is Bin Laden Now Innocent Until Proven Guilty?

Autodidact

Intentionally Blank
That's not right IMHO. One problem is that international laws which normally apply to more formal actions and operations, don't here. And that's wrong because there needs to be limits. But at the same time I don't feel we should capture him and give him some warm milk while we sit down and hold hands and talk it out.

This guy hanging in the public square is all I'm really concerned about. How he makes it there makes little difference to me.

Does it make any difference whether the guy hanging in the public square is Osama Bin Laden or Osama Bin Loden? Or are you satisfied as long as someone hangs?

What if they arrest you and claim that you're Osama Bin Laden? Should you be entitled to a trial to prove that you're NoahideHiker, not Osama Bin Laden? This is what happened to Khalid al-Masri, a German citizen the U.S. captured because they spelled his name wrong. They got the wrong guy. My question to you: when they mistakenly captured the wrong guy, should he have the right to tell that to someone, or should they be able to lock him up for the rest of his life without ever having to show that he's the right guy?
 

Dunemeister

Well-Known Member
baghdad shmagdad ,Bin laden is the enemy of America and its citizens and has issued two fatwas stating that Muslims should kill civilians and military from the united States. the Taliban have not been ejected and he is still at large, which has more to do with the fact that he is probably in waziristan and not Afghanistan, than anything to do with Baghdad. its time to wake up to the fact that the Taliban and its minor ally Al Queda are not just in Afghanistan and make another wild detour or go home.

Waziristan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

the Pakistanis have just given one of the four waziri tribal leaders 20 million dollars for a ceasefire, the reason we don't have Bin laden is because he is not in Afghanistan and neither are half the Taliban . and we are too scared to tilt the balance in favor of the fundamentalists in Pakistan, and end up with a bin Laden Sympathizing Pakistani government.

Look, it's all a show. Bin Laden knows that if he can keep needling the USA, he'll eventually get what he wants, namely an Islamic revolution among Arabs. He'll get that revolution because he knows that the United States, if sufficiently provoked, will wander into the Middle East like a drunken sailor and provoke Arab hatred against them. This hatred will then be turned into an Islamist revolution throughout the Arab world.

In other words, OBL's consistent fatwas and other provocations (including 9/11) don't represent any desire of BL's to destroy the USA. He's not stupid enough to believe it could happen. Rather the USA (and increasingly, Europe) is easy to provoke to middle east violence. And he can use that to further his domestic causes.
 

Joe_Stocks

Back from the Dead
Hi Sunstone,

Of course he's innocent until proven guilty. Would you prefer to live in a country where the president or chairman could declare you guilty without a trial? Then move to China. Or Cuba. Or North Korea.

My point is, if he is innocent until proven guilty, then why are we trying to kill him?

And that goes for every person we fight in both wars. If they are innocent and have rights, then it would be unlawful for our military to conduct operations where all of these innocent people get killed.
 

Joe_Stocks

Back from the Dead
Hi Midnight,

What's the problem? Do you think there's a lack of evidence to show that he's guilty?

The problem is that our military is trying to kill him. And that would go for every soldier our military encounters, we can't go around killing these people if they have rights and are innocent until proven guilty. We would have to ask them questions first.

Wouldn't this make fighting any war very problematic and absurd?
 

Joe_Stocks

Back from the Dead
Hi 9/10ths,

If the crimes you're talking about are those that occurred in the US (I have to specify, since it seems to me like he's engaged in crimes all over the world), then why wouldn't he be subject to all the normal protections of the law?

Assuming you're talking about 9/11...

If a foreign citizen shoots and kills an American citizen in New York City, he's tried with murder in the normal way. If that foreign citizen flees to some other country, he's extradited to the US and then tried in the normal way. If a foreign citizen in some other country pays someone in New York City to shoot an American citizen, that foreign citizen is extradited to the US and then tried in the normal way.

The "normal way" includes the presumption of innocence until guilt is proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Killing 3,000 people is definitely of greater magnitude than killing a single person, but it's still a difference of degree, not of some fundamental nature of the crime.

It certainly seems to me that Osama bin Laden is a mass murderer; he should be tried as such. Do you really think that meeting the normal standard of proof would be difficult with Osama bin Laden?

That all sounds good until we dropped bombs on tora bora where we thought he was hiding out. Wouldn't it be unlawful for our military to attempt to kill someone who is presumed innocent?
 

Joe_Stocks

Back from the Dead
Hi lilithu,

What do you mean "NOW innocent until proven guilty?" The Supreme Court simply upheld what has always been the case. People, no matter who they are, are legally presumed innocent until proven guilty. That means they have the right to a fair and reasonably speedy trial. It certainly does not mean that you can't go after people who we have reason to believe have committed a crime. Unless you're suggesting that the Supreme Court has ruled that police officers can't arrest anyone because they're presumed innocent?

No, I really mean now because we tried to kill him before. We bombed the mountains in Afghanistan in hopes of killing him. It wouldn't be right to attempt to kill an innocent person.

C'mon Joe, do you actually disagree with SCOTUS' decision to uphold one of the most cherished principles of our democracy? Or are you just looking for any possibility, no matter how far-fetched, to poke at liberals?

No, I am being dead serious here. If UBL is innocent until proven guilty we legally can't try to kill him, which we have done. And that goes for every soldier our military encounters, he has rights, he is innocent until proven guilty by a federal judge. Therefore, our military can't really conduct actual military operations anymore because we must tell the soldiers before we engage them that they have these cherished rights.
 

kai

ragamuffin
Would eliminating Bin Laden have any effect on the middle east brouhaha at this point/
if you mean israel/palestinian brouhaha, no not a jot ,if you mean Iraq ,no not a jot if you mean Afghanistan , no not a jot
 

kai

ragamuffin
Look, it's all a show. Bin Laden knows that if he can keep needling the USA, he'll eventually get what he wants, namely an Islamic revolution among Arabs. He'll get that revolution because he knows that the United States, if sufficiently provoked, will wander into the Middle East like a drunken sailor and provoke Arab hatred against them. This hatred will then be turned into an Islamist revolution throughout the Arab world.
its allready happened its history , the revolution you speak of is a bit of a failure in Bin Ladens eyes because its wheels are turnng too slowly
In other words, OBL's consistent fatwas and other provocations (including 9/11) don't represent any desire of BL's to destroy the USA. He's not stupid enough to believe it could happen. Rather the USA (and increasingly, Europe) is easy to provoke to middle east violence. And he can use that to further his domestic causes.

the world is Bin Ladens domestic cause, know your enemy!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qutbism
 

kai

ragamuffin
Hi lilithu,



No, I really mean now because we tried to kill him before. We bombed the mountains in Afghanistan in hopes of killing him. It wouldn't be right to attempt to kill an innocent person.



No, I am being dead serious here. If UBL is innocent until proven guilty we legally can't try to kill him, which we have done. And that goes for every soldier our military encounters, he has rights, he is innocent until proven guilty by a federal judge. Therefore, our military can't really conduct actual military operations anymore because we must tell the soldiers before we engage them that they have these cherished rights.


he is in a combat zone leading insurgents against coalition forces if he is killed in action thereis nothng ilegal in that , if he is captured then he must stand trial. no different than an IRA terrorist or a Baader-meinhof
 

Smoke

Done here.
The problem is that our military is trying to kill him.
I'm not convinced they are. Bush has said several times, in several ways, that he's not that worried about catching bin Laden.

If we are trying to kill him, that is a matter for concern. If we've been trying, really trying, for seven years, we're not doing so good.

I don't think Bush really wants to kill bin Laden. I don't think bin Laden really wants to kill Bush. I'm sure they hate each other, but they need each other, too. If all you've got to offer is half-baked religious extremism and a crackpot scheme for world domination, you've got to have an enemy. There's got to be a demon in the shadows, a big bad wolf at the door. You've got to have something to motivate the masses, and nothing motivates people like that raw, primal hatred that is born only of fear.
 

Joe_Stocks

Back from the Dead
Hi Midnight,

I'm not convinced they are. Bush has said several times, in several ways, that he's not that worried about catching bin Laden.

We surely dropped bombs in the mountains of Afghanistan with the intent on killing him. Not only that but we killed many Taliban and other fighters that were not given a hearing in front of a federal judge.

I don't think Bush really wants to kill bin Laden. I don't think bin Laden really wants to kill Bush. I'm sure they hate each other, but they need each other, too.

I believe UBL's worldview is much broader and sophisticated than having George W. Bush on the mind as his central focus. UBL has had these ambitions before he even knew who dubya even was.
 

Smoke

Done here.
I believe UBL's worldview is much broader and sophisticated than having George W. Bush on the mind as his central focus. UBL has had these ambitions before he even knew who dubya even was.
True. But Bush serves a useful purpose for Obama.
 

Dunemeister

Well-Known Member
the world is Bin Ladens domestic cause, know your enemy!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qutbism

No doubt Qutbism has "influenced" Bin Laden, but how much? My point is that his organization's immediate goal is Islamic revolution among Arabs. America is not the direct target. And this should cause us to think about our strategy, especially with respect to Al Queda. After all, it can't be said with any seriousness that the current strategy is working.
 

kai

ragamuffin
No doubt Qutbism has "influenced" Bin Laden, but how much? My point is that his organization's immediate goal is Islamic revolution among Arabs. America is not the direct target. And this should cause us to think about our strategy, especially with respect to Al Queda. After all, it can't be said with any seriousness that the current strategy is working.


Qutbism has gained notoriety from its massive influence on jihadi extremists like bin laden. what gives you the impression the Us is not a direct target? and its not working because very little people try to understand the nature of the problem, they think they are dealing with the likes of IRA or the red Brigades etc.

Qutbism integratesthe Islamist teachings of Maududi and al Banna with the arguments of SayyidQutb to justify armed jihad in the advance of Islam, and other violent methods utilized by twentieth century militants. Qutbism advocates violence and justifies terrorism against non-Muslims and apostates in an effort to bring about the reign of God. sounds crazy huh ------it is​
 

Dunemeister

Well-Known Member
Qutbism has gained notoriety from its massive influence on jihadi extremists like bin laden. what gives you the impression the Us is not a direct target? and its not working because very little people try to understand the nature of the problem, they think they are dealing with the likes of IRA or the red Brigades etc.

Qutbism integratesthe Islamist teachings of Maududi and al Banna with the arguments of SayyidQutb to justify armed jihad in the advance of Islam, and other violent methods utilized by twentieth century militants. Qutbism advocates violence and justifies terrorism against non-Muslims and apostates in an effort to bring about the reign of God. sounds crazy huh ------it is​
Yes. Qutbism advocates violence against all and sundry. But the violence is intended to provoke foreign powers to invade Arab lands, and thereby generate grassroots opposition to those powers. That opposition, theoretically, should generate Islamic revolution that will sweep the Arab world. After that, concern would center on the non-Arabic Islamic world, and thence to non-Islamic areas.

The point is that AT THIS POINT, America is a target, not because OBL wants to overthrow it (he's not stupid enough to think he can do that) but to provoke the US to do what it's doing -- stagger around the world punishing all who would dare attack it.

Frankly, the most effective means America could use against OBL is (a) desist military action; and (b) remedy their poor relations with the Islamic world. Forget revenge. For in pursuing it, America serves OBL in the most profound and effective way. Going forward, pursue attackers by means of international law. If that law is unhelpful, continue to build international relations and institutions to make it better. This cowboyish going it alone has only caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi citizens. Let's not forget that 3000 or so people died in 9/11 -- haven't their deaths been more than avenged by those hundreds of thousands?
 

kai

ragamuffin
Yes. Qutbism advocates violence against all and sundry. But the violence is intended to provoke foreign powers to invade Arab lands, and thereby generate grassroots opposition to those powers. That opposition, theoretically, should generate Islamic revolution that will sweep the Arab world. After that, concern would center on the non-Arabic Islamic world, and thence to non-Islamic areas. to Bin Laden and his allies the so called Islamic states are apostate and must be cleansed and reborn before "the rubbish heap of the west" is dealt with.

The point is that AT THIS POINT, America is a target, not because OBL wants to overthrow it (he's not stupid enough to think he can do that) but to provoke the US to do what it's doing -- stagger around the world punishing all who would dare attack it.
on the contrary he attacks to make you leave Muslim lands , he wishes to inflict enough damage so that people will force your governments to withdraw and let him get on with "business" he knows its only a matter of waiting it out and the coalition will withdraw ,America is in the way.

Frankly, the most effective means America could use against OBL is (a) desist military action; and (b) remedy their poor relations with the Islamic world. Forget revenge. For in pursuing it, America serves OBL in the most profound and effective way. Going forward, pursue attackers by means of international law. If that law is unhelpful, continue to build international relations and institutions to make it better. This cowboyish going it alone has only caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi citizens. Let's not forget that 3000 or so people died in 9/11 -- haven't their deaths been more than avenged by those hundreds of thousands?

we could do that, withdraw from all Muslim lands, let the Taliban and their allies retake Afghanistan(remember to Bin Laden the Taliban were the only true Islamic government in the world) see what happens in Pakistan ,Iraq and Iran, but in order to fully placate them you will have to end all support to the little Satan of Israel. Then if you think you can rest easy you would still be wrong. You don't honestly believe you can build international relations with such people.
 

McBell

Admiral Obvious
we could do that, withdraw from all Muslim lands, let the Taliban and their allies retake Afghanistan(remember to Bin Laden the Taliban were the only true Islamic government in the world) see what happens in Pakistan ,Iraq and Iran, but in order to fully placate them you will have to end all support to the little Satan of Israel. Then if you think you can rest easy you would still be wrong. You don't honestly believe you can build international relations with such people.
I agree.
Much better to just set a date and then start bombing the crap out of everyone and let their gods claim them.
 
Top