US has the BODY of Osama Bin Laden

♏*PHOENIX*♏ - posted on 05/01/2011 ( 357 moms have responded )

4,455

6

379

It is reported that he is Dead, killed in Afghanistan

MOST HELPFUL POSTS

Esther - posted on 05/05/2011

3,513

32

144

For all those who like to paint the US as this bloodthirsty, war mongering country: please give me the latest, hell any example, of the US invading or waging war against a peaceful country that respected it's own citizens without provocation. Anyone?



Also, when there is trouble in the world, i.e. Darfur, Yugoslavia etc., who does everyone look to for help? Last I checked it wasn't Switzerland. As a matter of fact, even collectively the European countries couldn't do anything about the war in Yugoslavia, right in their own back yard, without the help of the US. I'm also quite confident that the Jews during WWII didn't think the US was this bloodthirsty evil empire. Just a hunch. But maybe the allies should have been tried to understand where Hitler was coming from too and looked first at what they (or the jews) had done to upset him. Uhuh sure.

Jenny - posted on 05/03/2011

4,426

16

126

This describes how I feel about it all:

TZM: Response to Media; Death of Osama bin Laden



On May 1, 2011 Pres. Barack Obama appeared on national television with the spontaneous announcement that Osama bin Laden, the purported organizer of the tragic events of September 11th 2001, was killed by military forces in Pakistan.



Within moments, a media blitz ran across virtually all television networks in what could only be described as a grotesque celebratory display, reflective of a level of emotional immaturity that borders on cultural psychosis. Depictions of people running through the streets of New York and Washington chanting jingoistic American slogans, waving their flags like the members of some cult, praising the death of another human being, reveals yet another layer of this sickness we call modern society.



It is not the scope of this response to address the political usage of such an event or to illuminate the staged orchestration of how public perception was to be controlled by the mainstream media and the United States Government. Rather the point of this article is to express the gross irrationality apparent and how our culture becomes so easily fixed and emotionally charged with respect to surface symbology, rather than true root problems, solutions or rational considerations of circumstance.



The first and most obvious point is that the death of Osama bin Laden means nothing when it comes to the problem of international terrorism. His death simply serves as catharsis for a culture that has a neurotic fixation on revenge and retribution. The very fact that the Government which, from a psychological standpoint, has always served as a paternal figure for it citizens, reinforces the idea that murdering people is a solution to anything should be enough for most of us to take pause and consider the quality of the values coming out of the zeitgeist itself.



However, beyond the emotional distortions and tragic, vindictive pattern of rewarding the continuation of human division and violence comes a more practical consideration regarding what the problem really is and the importance of that problem with respect to priority.



The death of any human being is of an immeasurable consequence in society. It is never just the death of the individual. It is the death of relationships, companionship, support and the integrity of familial and communal environments. The unnecessary deaths of 3000 people on September 11, 2001 is no more or no less important than the deaths of those during the World Wars, via cancer and disease, accidents or anything else.



As a society, it is safe to say that we seek a world that strategically limits all such unnecessary consequences through social approaches that allow for the greatest safety our ingenuity can create. It is in this context that the neurotic obsession with the events of September 11th, 2001 become gravely insulting and detrimental to progress. An environment has now been created where outrageous amounts of money, resources and energy is spent seeking and destroying very small subcultures of human beings that pose ideological differences and act on those differences through violence.



Yet, in the United States alone each year, roughly 30,000 people die from automobile accidents, the majority of which could be stopped by very simple structural changes. That's ten 9/11's each year... yet no one seems to pine over this epidemic. Likewise, over 1 million Americans die from heart disease and cancer annually - causes of which are now easily linked to environmental influences in the majority. Yet, regardless of the over 330 9/11's occurring each year in this context, the governmental budget allocations for research on these illnesses is only a fraction of the money spent on “anti-terrorism” operations.



Such a list could go on and on and with regard to the perversion of priority when it comes to what it means to truly save and protect human life and I hope many out there can recognize the severe unbalance we have at hand with respect to our values.



So, coming back to the point of revenge and retribution, I will conclude this response with a quote from Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., likely the most brilliant intuitive mind when it came to conflict and the power of non-violence. On September 15, 1963 a Birmingham Alabama church was bombed, killing four little girls attending Sunday school.



In a public address, Dr. King stated:



“What murdered these four girls? Look around. You will see that many people that you never thought about participated in this evil act. So tonight all of us must leave here with a new determination to struggle. God has a job for us to do. Maybe our mission is to save the soul of America. We can't save the soul of this nation throwing bricks. We can't save the soul of this nation getting our ammunitions and going out shooting physical weapons. We must know that we have something much more powerful. Just take up the ammunition of love.”

- Dr. Martin Luther King, 1963



~Peter Joseph

www.thezeitgeistmovement.com

Isobel - posted on 05/02/2011

9,849

0

282

When Iranian revolutionaries entered the U.S. embassy in Tehran in 1979 and seized 52 Americans, President Jimmy Carter dismissed reminders of America's long intervention in Iran as "ancient history." Carter's point was not merely that previous U.S. policy could not excuse the hostage taking. His adjective also implied that there was nothing of value to be learned from that history. In his view, dredging up old matters was more than unhelpful; it was also dangerous, presumably because it could only serve the interests of America's adversaries. Thus, to raise historical issues was at least unpatriotic and maybe worse.[1]

As the United States finds itself in the aftermath of another crisis in the Middle East, it is worth the risk of opprobrium to ask why there should be hostility toward America in that region. Some insight can be gained by surveying official U.S. conduct in the Middle East since the end of World War II. Acknowledged herein is a fundamental, yet deplorably overlooked, distinction between understanding and excusing. The purpose of this survey is not to pardon acts of violence against innocent people but to understand the reasons that drive people to violent political acts.[2] The stubborn and often self-serving notion that the historical record is irrelevant because political violence is inexcusable ensures that Americans will be caught in crises in the Middle East and elsewhere for many years to come.

Sheldon L. Richman is senior editor at the Cato Institute.

After 70 years of broken Western promises regarding Arab independence, it should not be surprising that the West is viewed with suspicion and hostility by the populations (as opposed to some of the political regimes) of the Middle East.[3] The United States, as the heir to British imperialism in the region, has been a frequent object of suspicion. Since the end of World War II, the United States, like the European colonial powers before it, has been unable to resist becoming entangled in the region's political conflicts. Driven by a desire to keep the vast oil reserves in hands friendly to the United States, a wish to keep out potential rivals (such as the Soviet Union), opposition to neutrality in the cold war, and domestic political considerations, the United States has compiled a record of tragedy in the Middle East. The most recent part of that record, which includes U.S. alliances with Iraq to counter Iran and then with Iran and Syria to counter Iraq, illustrates a theme that has been played in Washington for the last 45 years.

An examination of the details and consequences of that theme provides a startling object lesson in the pitfalls and conceit of an interventionist foreign policy. The two major components of the theme that are covered in this study are U.S. policy toward Iran and the relations between Israel and the Arabs. Events in which those components overlapped--development of the Carter Doctrine, the Iran-Iraq War, and the Persian Gulf War--will also be examined.

In the aftermath of the most overt and direct U.S. attempt to manage affairs in the Middle East, the Persian Gulf War, it is more important than ever to understand how the United States came to be involved in the region and the disastrous consequences of that involvement. President Bush's willingness to sacrifice American lives to remove Iraqi forces from Kuwait, to restore the "legitimate" government of that feudal monarchy, and to create a "new world order" proceeds logically from the premises and policies of past administrations. Indeed, there is little new in Bush's new world order, except the Soviet Union's assistance. That may mean the new order will be far more dangerous than the old, because it will feature an activist U.S. foreign policy without the inhibitions that were formerly imposed by the superpower rivalry. That bodes ill for the people of the Middle East, as well as for the long-suffering American citizens, who will see their taxes continue to rise, their consumer economy increasingly distorted by military spending, and their blood spilled--all in the name of U.S. leadership
...............................................

There's a little bit...fine, it wasn't Afghanistan but OBL wasn't even from Afghanistan, their feelings were that all muslims have been controlled and oppressed for too long.

I can't say enough that I believe the Taliban was evil, that what they did was wrong! I just find it frustrating to hear over and over again how innocent the U.S. is.

JL - posted on 05/02/2011

3,635

48

105

The thing that many people are failing to understand is that Osama Bin Laden said more than once that he would go out in a shoot out. He did not want to be captured alive and taken to court. He would have done anything to avoid that fate because he wanted to be a martyr. If you think he would have been captured so easily without putting up a fight..without let's say using females as human shields and willingly letting his family members die to avoid capture..then you need a reality check. The reality is that the only way justice was going to be served was going to be by a shoot out where in the end Bin Laden was killed. In a perfect world he would have been caught 10 years ago, went to trial and then prison for life. But then again in a perfect world he would have not perpetrated the acts of violence he did. Yes, his death will NOT end terrorism but according to Counterintelligence agents in the US military it will strike a blow to the heart of the organizations. It was also add to the momentum created by the revolutions sweeping throughout the Middle East that are demanding new regimes and human rights!

Tah - posted on 05/05/2011

7,412

22

356

Give his side of the story....wowzers...I'm pretty sure he gave his side....if anyone is unclear of what his side was...just look up some of his videos....ask someone who lost a loved one or who sits at home on oxygen from going in to help on that horrible day...o I'd say his side of the story was told loud and clear.....goodness help us if we would have given him a chance to repeat himself.....

If you see this, leave this form field blank.
Powered by RESPECT not THUMPS

357 Comments

View replies by

Shannintipton - posted on 05/06/2011

36,025

50

522

@ Jennifer, not really. I was looking for someone but it looks like I should have been. LOL {:+)

Erin - posted on 05/06/2011

6,569

25

232

** Mod Warning **

Please refrain from the bickering and personal jabs. If it is an issue of tone, remember it is sometimes hard to decipher over the net and just move on.

Erin - DM Mod

Constance - posted on 05/06/2011

2,651

24

136

Laura You don't want to get me starte on my beliefs. Just because I chose to be an adult and not continiously fight with someone doesn't mean I am not able to state my opinion.

Constance - posted on 05/06/2011

2,651

24

136

I think this is really starting to be repedative. All Marina is saying is when you attack something that someone holds dear you are going to get negative reaction. When you attack US policies people are going to fight back and you are going to offend them. If you have a right to voice and defend your opinions then we also have the right to voice and defend our opinions. It doesn't make us oveally sensitive.

~♥Little Miss - posted on 05/06/2011

18,870

9

2998

Oh for fucks sake. This is pointless. I am done. MOST people in here use eachothers names to respond to eliminate confusion. Sorry for bruising your tender ego. You usually can put up a good debate....not today....taking things wicked personal. I am out. This has been thrown completely off track. Done. Peace out.

~♥Little Miss - posted on 05/06/2011

18,870

9

2998

Yes, and I was DIRECTLY responding to a comment you posted. I like to use peoples names when directly responding to a comment to eliminate confusion.

Isobel - posted on 05/06/2011

9,849

0

282

go back and read your posts...many of them actually have MY NAME in them...I'm pretty sure I only addressed you once...as an answer

Isobel - posted on 05/06/2011

9,849

0

282

actually...that was directed at EVERYBODY who was saying that we were ALL bashing America, which simply wasn't true.

~♥Little Miss - posted on 05/06/2011

18,870

9

2998

LOL...Laura...SERIOUSLY??? This is your original post directly after my first responce to you "I haven't seen more than one person vilify America in this thread either...could it be either that we are reading different threads or we are all being a little over-sensitive and seeing what we want to see?" Yup...sounded like you made it personal right there....for no reason.



Pretty sure you took everything that I said personnally. So, let me get this straight...I am not allowed to comment on a response in an open forum....well YOUR comments in particular, because you automatically are going to ASSUME I am making it personal??? Or are all of my responses going to be depicted as "sensitive"??? I just want to clarify for future threads that I am in with you.

Isobel - posted on 05/06/2011

9,849

0

282

I wasn't the one who made it personal...you were the one who quoted ME and basically said I had a shitty attitude... and this whole issue was because of me and MY shitty attitude...

~♥Little Miss - posted on 05/06/2011

18,870

9

2998

I never once said America is perfect, no country is. I just am tired of people (in general) bashing us. So, by the way you and Jenny are talking, I am not allowed to show any compassion for my country, or defend it in any way, if I do.....I might be "over sensitive". That is a bunch of crap.

~♥Little Miss - posted on 05/06/2011

18,870

9

2998

Laura "automatically assuming the worst from a person will MAKE their tone ugly when you can't see or hear them...and I think you just might do that"

WHY are you making this so personnal??? I mean seriously...judging my character without knowing me one bit. I saw what you were writing, and responded. Why can't you get past it?

The way you and Jenny are acting right now, I wouldn't be one bit surprised if you said "go pop a midol" or "she must be on the rag". I am not sure why you are making such a fuss.

Isobel - posted on 05/06/2011

9,849

0

282

You wanna know what I hate about MY country? we're hypocrites...there...I said it.

We talk about socialism and environmentalism...but our conservative government didn't even TRY to meet their promises to the Kyoto accord..and our social nets are eroding faster than the ice caps.

Isobel - posted on 05/06/2011

9,849

0

282

automatically assuming the worst from a person will MAKE their tone ugly when you can't see or hear them...and I think you just might do that

Isobel - posted on 05/06/2011

9,849

0

282

It must be when I go to Boston that they can see my face and hear my REAL tone...and we all seem to get along just fine ;)

~♥Little Miss - posted on 05/06/2011

18,870

9

2998

I am not getting "butt hurt" either Jenny, just explaining. Settle down.

Jenny - posted on 05/06/2011

4,426

16

126

I'm not the one getting butt hurt about it, just clarifying when I say US I'm not referring to the people but the policies. That's all.

~♥Little Miss - posted on 05/06/2011

18,870

9

2998

Ok, give me a bit of a break now. You are in a debating community, don't be over dramatic saying you shouldn't have to put a disclaimer on everything said in here. Whatever you say or make a comment about, may be debated, or responded to. Talk about being a bit overly sensitive



You criticize someones country, chances are you are going to offend someone. Whether it be about the government, the people, policies...whatever.



It is funny that you love Boston so much Laura...my attitude you love so much was raised there ;)

Jenny - posted on 05/06/2011

4,426

16

126

What Laura said. I don't feel I should have to put a disclaimer on every post. When I say the US, I mean the foreign policies carried forth by the American government. It's just a lot harder to type that out every time.



I see how the US is operating in the world today as a modern version of the British Empire. There has always been empire expanding and contracting on our planet and there will always be people and countries opposed to it. When you have troops stationed all over the world, you have to admit, it comes across like an occupation of sovereign nations. And I feel China will be the next in line for the expansion.



So put it this way: how many foreign countries have operating military bases on US soil? If they did how would they be viewed?

Isobel - posted on 05/06/2011

9,849

0

282

I think you guys think people are talking about people though, when they are clearly talking about the govt and foreign policy.



I LOVE America, Boston is the only city I've been to other than here that I could ever live. Some of my VERY favorite people are Americans.



You guys have added so much to the world (jazz, baseball, facebook, etc LOL) and have a culture all your own...many cultures in fact



I just get frustrated when you guys get SO defensive when people are bitching about your government's foreign policy and you feel like we're calling YOU an asshole.

Rosie - posted on 05/06/2011

8,657

30

315

you know what would make me happy? if we as citizens of a country that get targeted as hateful, bloodthirtsy, no good killers,would get to vote on whether to invade a country. of course that would mean that everybody would have secret information and would never work, but i just hate how the world associates our PEOPLE with our GOVERNMENT. in my life they are two very drastically different things.
something needs to be done where our politicians actually do what they claimed to want to do in the campaign. and not let media hype interfere with major decisions. i dont' know, i'm rambling now, but it just irritates me how we're vilified as people, and killed because of what our stupid ass government does. like jodi was talking about the first gulf war and how that was part of the reason that we were attacked. i'm sure many peole that died in 9/11 were like me, 13 at the time, not a care in the world and not having anything to do with that shit in the 90's. yet we're still blamed for it? i dont' get it.

Amber - posted on 05/06/2011

1,909

13

144

Feel better? :-)
Clear as day. I never thought your tone was a problem. And I agree with you.

Isobel - posted on 05/06/2011

9,849

0

282

well, when you say everybody is wrong for every little thing they criticize...it comes off like you think America is always in the right.

and I'm sorry if my tone is coming off wrong...I'll try one more time.

I'M GLAD OSAMA BIN LADEN IS DEAD, HE DESERVED WHAT HE GOT, AMERICA DID THE RIGHT THING GOING IN AND KILLING HIM. THEY DID NOT HAVE THE OPTION TO CAPTURE HIM ALIVE. I'M SURE THERE IS NOTHING THEY WOULD'VE LIKED MORE THAN TO PARADE HIM OUT AS A LIVE CAPTURE...BUT MEH...I DON'T REALLY CARE.

Then...the fact is...that I understand why the people in the middle east might not like America...does that mean America had 9-11 coming? NOOOO!

Amber - posted on 05/06/2011

1,909

13

144

I think that a lot of us were defending America because people were saying "well America did this and that" and we were saying, yes we did but there are two sides of that story. Then adding that we've also helped countries that we have done things too, even though it isn't usually reciprocal.

It doesn't mean that we whole heartedly agree. It just means that both sides of every story should be out there instead of dumping it all in the lap of only one of the involved parties.... It's upsetting to hear that people think we're the ones responsible for the majority of all evil acts that have occurred, even when we didn't start it.

I think America does a lot of things wrong. But I also don't know what decisions I would make if I were in command and trying to keep hundreds of millions of people safe. Maybe then you err on the side of caution because you don't want another terror attack? I don't know, because I haven't been there.

I just try to keep it in perspective and realize that the public is never given all the information. I can only speculate as to what actions I would take, given the limit information that is available. Maybe I'd make bad decisions too in that situation....

Isobel - posted on 05/06/2011

9,849

0

282

again...I'll have to suggest that perhaps we are being oversensitive and seeing what we want to see

~♥Little Miss - posted on 05/06/2011

18,870

9

2998

They were your words...you know what you were saying. That is one of the things you said that prompted my responce.

Isobel - posted on 05/06/2011

9,849

0

282

Laura, it was about the tone you were taking with it.
This is just one of your quotes that I was responding to "Perhaps it's the need to defend yourself from the America-haters...but several people have denied ANY wrong doing EVER on behalf of the United States in ANY conflict...and that's just silly.

Nobody's saying they deserved what they got...but there seem to be plenty of people saying that America can do no wrong."

.........................................

I don't understand what you are saying...just that you read my tone wrong?

Sara - posted on 05/06/2011

9,313

50

584

Laura, as you know I'm American and to your question I'd have to give a big fat NO.

~♥Little Miss - posted on 05/06/2011

18,870

9

2998

Why don't you re-read what I wrote, and maybe I will not need to answer your question.

Isobel - posted on 05/06/2011

9,849

0

282

well...you've always had issues with my tone, and I with yours so...perhaps we can both work on that Marina

Isobel - posted on 05/06/2011

9,849

0

282

Are you saying that America has been justified (morally and legally) in every conflict they have entered?

~♥Little Miss - posted on 05/06/2011

18,870

9

2998

Laura, it was about the tone you were taking with it.
This is just one of your quotes that I was responding to "Perhaps it's the need to defend yourself from the America-haters...but several people have denied ANY wrong doing EVER on behalf of the United States in ANY conflict...and that's just silly.

Nobody's saying they deserved what they got...but there seem to be plenty of people saying that America can do no wrong."

Constance - posted on 05/06/2011

2,651

24

136

Everyone can stand on different sides of every discussion. We all have our opinions and that is fine, but that needs to be done which is one things I hven't seen for everyone is to agree to disagree.
I realize I have very strong beliefs but I do respect other peoples opinions. I won't be quiet if someone is asking to risk the lives of anyone else. I also can't be quiet when people forget why the US and multiple countries around the world are involved. I wish there were other ways for things to be resolved that don't included killing but face it it isn'tjust the US military who carry guns. Every Government has agencies that carry guns and use themm as well. It would be wonderful if police officers could pull over a car and not have to worry if they are going to be shot in the head for doing their job, but that just isn't reality. Fighting againsst terroist is the world's last resort these aren't high school bullies that eventually will go away. They are going to keep killing innocent people just because the decide they aren't worthy to be alive. I support our military because we don't fight in the name of America it is to help othes around us.
When it comes to different opinions I do welcome them because there has to be a balance. It is like good and evil too much of one isn't how we find balance. Blance is the key to humanity.

Jenni - posted on 05/06/2011

5,928

34

373

@Marina, I don't think Laura is singling out Americans. Us Canadians were heavily involved in Afghanistan with you.

I personally didn't believe in that involvement. I don't know too many wars or military conflicts I really believe in. At the same time our countries are so intigrated and I believe the US would help us out if we needed them. So we were there and that part I can agree with. Backing up our allies.

I just don't see Afghanistan or Iraq, for that matter... as triumphant or justifiable endeavours.

Sara - posted on 05/06/2011

9,313

50

584

I think anyone who can't see how the US government has helped to support and encourage hate for us in the world is living in la-la land. I don't think that means that we deserve to be attacked and have innocent people killed, but I know that the actions of our gov't over the last several decades has only helped to further some causes, like Bin Laden's.



That being said, I still agree with the choice to get Bin Laden and ultimately shoot him. What can I say? 9/11 makes me bitter.

Isobel - posted on 05/06/2011

9,849

0

282

I haven't seen more than one person vilify America in this thread either...could it be either that we are reading different threads or we are all being a little over-sensitive and seeing what we want to see?

~♥Little Miss - posted on 05/06/2011

18,870

9

2998

Many times, you will get people that are deffensive of America, because someone is tearing us apart. If someone was to make fun of, or degrade your country, I would expect you to defend yours also.

  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. ...
  8. 8
If you see this, leave this form field blank.
Powered by RESPECT not THUMPS

Join Circle of Moms

Sign up for Circle of Moms and be a part of this community! Membership is just one click away.

Join Circle of Moms