Quote Of The Day

“8. Bin Laden was assassinated. He was not. First of all, he was the leader of a para-statal organization that had declared war on the United States. If the US could have stormed Hitler’s bunker and taken him out, it would not have been an assassination, any more than being able to take out an enemy general on the battlefield would be. Second, the SEALs fired only when he made a threatening move, which is a form of self-defense. There is every reason to believe that the US would have preferred to take Bin Laden alive, since they could have then interrogated him about ongoing terrorism plans.” — Juan Cole, on whether Osama Bin Laden was “assassinated”

6 Responses to “Quote Of The Day”

  1. Jon says:

    What’s interesting to me is the constant changing story. First he was using a woman as a human shield and fighting them off. Then he was unarmed, but had a weapon. Not sure what that means. And he wasn’t using a human shield. The video should help clarify all this. Now we learn there is no video and apparently that shot of Obama and his staff watching it live was not really them watching it live. And there’s no video available. And of course the body is unavailable. In the end we just have no clue what happened, which is typical of our secretive government. Too bad, but not surprising.

  2. Do you think they should have published his deceased picture?

  3. Jon says:

    I don’t have strong opinions on that one way or the other.

    What they should have done is taken him alive. It’s just amazing to me how susceptible our population is to mob mentality. We are told to hate someone and we do. And just going in and shooting him even though for all we can tell he’s an unarmed man, is just fine.

    We have to get past believing what we are told to believe and put ourselves in their shoes. Here’s an uncomfortable fact. While OBL is probably a murderer, the scale of the death is small contrasted to the world’s worst atrocities. Reagan presided over an administration that’s policies towards Latin America were far more destructive. What would you think if a fighting force from El Salvador just stormed his ranch and shot him in the head and shot Nancy in the leg because she lunged at these elite fighters?

    The reality is I don’t know how much Reagan was personally responsible for the atrocities in El Salvador. He definitely seems to have sympathized with those that directed the violence, but Reagan might possibly have had very little involvement in the direction of the criminal behavior. Maybe Reagan was a puppet. Justice for El Salvador means you capture Reagan and put him no trial. You use the system to actually determine what his level of involvement was and maybe try and determine who else was involved. It’s obvious to everyone that you don’t just shoot a white American leader in the head. Suddenly it’s not so obvious with these darker skinned people. The double standard can’t be denied and it’s a result of the fact that conditioning just works.

  4. What about Juan Cole’s points above? He seems to directly address the claims you are making (declared war on US, threatening move, etc) …mean nothing?

  5. Jon says:

    Well that’s just it. What is a threatening move? His wife charged? What happened? If he seriously threatened or if there was even a question, then yes, the killing was justified. What if he was captured and immobilized? Maybe that’s what we were dealing with. Unfortunately we can’t trust our government, so we don’t know what happened.

  6. Fernando says:

    I was there for that. I see your scribbling, and it really is insulting.

    150 thousand people died in that war and your group “Democrat garbage” supported the very people who did commit genocide against other Latino groups with in the region.

    The only thing that Consoles me? Is that the one who lead the charge against this country, and with in this country that affected the course of the war in Central America is dead.

    Like I have stated before; The truth is the truth. Not the way I see it nor the way you see it. It just is, and it has a hell of a kick to it.

    ——————————————————————————–Jon; The reality is I don’t know how much Reagan was personally responsible for the atrocities in El Salvador. He definitely seems to have sympathized with those that directed the violence, but Reagan might possibly have had very little involvement in the direction of the criminal behavior. Maybe Reagan was a puppet. Justice for El Salvador means you capture Reagan and put him no trial. You use the system to actually determine what his level of involvement was and maybe try and determine who else was involved. It’s obvious to everyone that you don’t just shoot a white American leader in the head. Suddenly it’s not so obvious with these darker skinned people. The double standard can’t be denied and it’s a result of the fact that conditioning just works.

Leave a Reply