Friday, 14 November 2014

Osama bin Laden was murdered by the Americans

SHARE
A former US Navy Seal, 'Rob' O'Neil, has said he killed Osama bin Laden. It is clear from the man's account, assuming it is true as I do, that he murdered Bin Ladin. The USA clearly did not want their great enemy to stand trial - in Pakistan or New York - and use the opportunity for making himself a hero in the eyes of Muslims.

This reminds me of Margaret Thatcher ordering the SAS to shoot IRA men trying to cause an outrage in Gibraltar many years ago. Mr O'Neill should be tried for murder. Why is no-one in the USA saying this?

8 comments:

  1. I suppose the Americans were inspired by Winston Churchill, who wanted the main Nazi leaders summarily executed instead of putting them on trial.
    Some things are fair in love and war.
    marc

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is not one of those things - there is no justification for killing an unarmed man in cold blood. The US Government lied about it. They did not kill him because they feared he could blow up the whole building - that was just for the children. They did not want him alive.

      If WSC said that he meant only that these trials were not legitimate, not that he really advocated this. I remember that Churchill was opposed to the Nuremburg trials and said to one of his colleagues, 'You and i must be very careful not to lose the next war.' He very properly thought that the trials had no locus standi, and the crimes the defendants were accused of were not crimes. I thought the same until recently but have come to see that the ICC is having a deterrent effect on potential defendants. By the way it is very possible that they would have found it hard to convict OBL of responsibility for the Sept 11 atrocity. Cheney himself said that the US had never said OBL was responsible. But it would have been a rivetting trial and an example of the rule of law.

      Delete
    2. That is precisely my point -- Churchill wanted to avoid the precedent of Nuremberg. The alternative -- to let the bastards walk free -- was equally objectionable. Therefore summarily despatching them would have been the most expedient course of action. No tears.

      The same was supposed to be the case here. the Seals are expected to operate in a system of "omerta". We should not have been privy to the details of the operation (like what goes into the making of sausage or the deliberations in a jury room). It would have been entirely plausible to have imagined Bin Laden reaching for his Kalashnikov and being gunned down. Case closed.

      The alternative would have been to put a missile into the compound, but then someone would have had to go in with a Q-tip to collect enough DNA evidence to prove that the man was dead. (And given Murphy's law, there would of course have been a wedding reception in the compound the moment the missile hit.)
      marc
      p.s. did you know that Allied officers in D-Day were instructed to take no prisoners after landing in Normandy? How do you square that with the Komissar befehl of the Fuehrer?


      Delete
    3. I am rethinking my entire attitude to the last war. Can we still call it the last war anymore when there have been so many others? I still think that it was uncivilised to kill Osama bin Laden.

      Delete
    4. Please read this recent post, if you have not already done so, to see where my thinking is taking me. http://pvewood.blogspot.ro/2014/11/putin-has-defended-nazi-soviet-pact.html

      Delete
  2. Nonsense.

    The man and his organization declared war on the US.

    "..there is no justification for killing an unarmed man in cold blood..."

    See my above comment. Should the Seal have waited for bin laden to grab a gun and allow him on more chance to take an infidel with him to paradise?

    Cold blood, indeed is the man who caused the death of those on 9/11 AND all those afterwards in Afghanistan and thru out the world.





    ReplyDelete
  3. I cannot but agree with the last comment. Why would you propose a civilized trial for a man who only had contempt and hatred for the civilized western world, and was responsible, at least indirectly, for the deaths of thousands of innocent, unsuspecting people? The old saying "live by the sword, die by the sword" is entirely appropriate here.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What an absolutely outrageous thing to say, Frank.

      Delete